Kim J Cox1, Marit L Bovbjerg2, Melissa Cheyney3, Lawrence M Leeman4. 1. College of Nursing, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA. 2. College of Public Health and Human Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 3. Department of Anthropology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA. 4. School of Medicine, Departments of Family & Community Medicine and Obstetrics & Gynecology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In the United States, the number of planned home vaginal births after cesarean (VBACs) has increased. This study describes the maternal and neonatal outcomes for women who planned a VBAC at home with midwives who were contributing data to the Midwives Alliance of North America Statistics Project 2.0 cohort during the years 2004-2009. METHOD: Two subsamples were created from the parent cohort: 12,092 multiparous women without a prior cesarean and 1,052 women with a prior cesarean. Descriptive statistics were calculated for maternal and neonatal outcomes for both groups. Sensitivity analyses comparing women with a prior vaginal birth and those who were at the lowest risk with various subgroups in the parent cohort were also conducted. RESULTS: Women with a prior cesarean had a VBAC rate of 87 percent, although transfer rates were higher compared with women without a prior cesarean (18% vs 7%, p < 0.001). The most common indication for transfer was failure to progress. Women with a prior cesarean had higher proportions of blood loss, maternal postpartum infections, uterine rupture, and neonatal intensive care unit admissions than those without a prior cesarean. Five neonatal deaths (4.75/1,000) occurred in the prior cesarean group compared with 1.24/1,000 in multiparas without a history of cesarean (p = 0.015). CONCLUSION: Although there is a high likelihood of a vaginal birth at home, women planning a home VBAC should be counseled regarding maternal transfer rates and potential for increased risk to the newborn, particularly if uterine rupture occurs in the home setting.
BACKGROUND: In the United States, the number of planned home vaginal births after cesarean (VBACs) has increased. This study describes the maternal and neonatal outcomes for women who planned a VBAC at home with midwives who were contributing data to the Midwives Alliance of North America Statistics Project 2.0 cohort during the years 2004-2009. METHOD: Two subsamples were created from the parent cohort: 12,092 multiparous women without a prior cesarean and 1,052 women with a prior cesarean. Descriptive statistics were calculated for maternal and neonatal outcomes for both groups. Sensitivity analyses comparing women with a prior vaginal birth and those who were at the lowest risk with various subgroups in the parent cohort were also conducted. RESULTS:Women with a prior cesarean had a VBAC rate of 87 percent, although transfer rates were higher compared with women without a prior cesarean (18% vs 7%, p < 0.001). The most common indication for transfer was failure to progress. Women with a prior cesarean had higher proportions of blood loss, maternal postpartum infections, uterine rupture, and neonatal intensive care unit admissions than those without a prior cesarean. Five neonatal deaths (4.75/1,000) occurred in the prior cesarean group compared with 1.24/1,000 in multiparas without a history of cesarean (p = 0.015). CONCLUSION: Although there is a high likelihood of a vaginal birth at home, women planning a home VBAC should be counseled regarding maternal transfer rates and potential for increased risk to the newborn, particularly if uterine rupture occurs in the home setting.
Authors: Marit L Bovbjerg; Mekhala V Dissanayake; Melissa Cheyney; Jennifer Brown; Jonathan M Snowden Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2019-09-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: A I Girsen; J A Mayo; D J Lyell; Y J Blumenfeld; D K Stevenson; Y Y El-Sayed; G M Shaw; M L Druzin Journal: J Perinatol Date: 2017-11-09 Impact factor: 2.521
Authors: Ellen L Tilden; Melissa Cheyney; Jeanne-Marie Guise; Cathy Emeis; Jodi Lapidus; Frances M Biel; Jack Wiedrick; Jonathan M Snowden Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2016-12-09 Impact factor: 8.661