Matthew S Fore1, Amanda A Allshouse2, Nicole S Carlson3, K Joseph Hurt4. 1. Obstetrics and Gynecology, Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Hershey, Pennsylvania. 2. Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maternal Fetal Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah. 3. Emory University Nell Hodgson Woodruff School of Nursing, Atlanta, Georgia. 4. Obstetrics and Gynecology, Maternal Fetal Medicine & Reproductive Sciences, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora, Colorado.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: One approach to decreasing the cesarean birth rate in the United States is to increase the availability of birth attendants, including certified nurse-midwives (CNMs), who offer trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC). We examined associations between provider type and mode of birth for women attempting vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC). METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study at a United States academic medical center using prospectively-collected data (2005-2012). We included healthy women with term singleton vertex pregnancies after one or two prior cesareans who were managed by obstetricians or CNMs. We assessed unplanned cesarean birth by provider type using univariate and logistic regression and examined labor interventions and predicted VBAC success. RESULTS: Overall VBAC success was 88% for 502 included patients. Unplanned cesarean rates were similar by provider type. Black race, no prior VBAC, recurring clinical indication for cesarean, labor augmentation/induction, and any Pitocin use were associated with increased unplanned cesarean. Higher parity and early-term gestational age at delivery were associated with decreased unplanned cesarean. Postpartum hemorrhage and composite maternal morbidity were increased with unplanned cesarean, but there was no difference in neonatal outcome by mode of delivery or provider type. Obstetricians had slightly higher composite adverse maternal outcomes. Nomogram-predicted VBAC success but not provider type was associated with unplanned cesarean. CONCLUSIONS: Unplanned cesarean was similar for patients attempting labor after cesarean managed by midwives or obstetricians. Increasing the number of CNMs who manage TOLAC may help decrease the high rate of cesareans.
BACKGROUND: One approach to decreasing the cesarean birth rate in the United States is to increase the availability of birth attendants, including certified nurse-midwives (CNMs), who offer trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC). We examined associations between provider type and mode of birth for women attempting vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC). METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study at a United States academic medical center using prospectively-collected data (2005-2012). We included healthy women with term singleton vertex pregnancies after one or two prior cesareans who were managed by obstetricians or CNMs. We assessed unplanned cesarean birth by provider type using univariate and logistic regression and examined labor interventions and predicted VBAC success. RESULTS: Overall VBAC success was 88% for 502 included patients. Unplanned cesarean rates were similar by provider type. Black race, no prior VBAC, recurring clinical indication for cesarean, labor augmentation/induction, and any Pitocin use were associated with increased unplanned cesarean. Higher parity and early-term gestational age at delivery were associated with decreased unplanned cesarean. Postpartum hemorrhage and composite maternal morbidity were increased with unplanned cesarean, but there was no difference in neonatal outcome by mode of delivery or provider type. Obstetricians had slightly higher composite adverse maternal outcomes. Nomogram-predicted VBAC success but not provider type was associated with unplanned cesarean. CONCLUSIONS: Unplanned cesarean was similar for patients attempting labor after cesarean managed by midwives or obstetricians. Increasing the number of CNMs who manage TOLAC may help decrease the high rate of cesareans.
Authors: Nicole S Carlson; Jeremy L Neal; Ellen L Tilden; Denise C Smith; Rachel B Breman; Nancy K Lowe; Mary S Dietrich; Julia C Phillippi Journal: Birth Date: 2018-11-09 Impact factor: 3.689
Authors: Victoria H Coleman; Kristine Erickson; Jay Schulkin; Stanley Zinberg; Benjamin P Sachs Journal: J Reprod Med Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 0.142
Authors: Catherine Y Spong; Mark B Landon; Sharon Gilbert; Dwight J Rouse; Kenneth J Leveno; Michael W Varner; Atef H Moawad; Hyagriv N Simhan; Margaret Harper; Ronald J Wapner; Yoram Sorokin; Menachem Miodovnik; Marshall Carpenter; Alan M Peaceman; Mary J O'Sullivan; Baha M Sibai; Oded Langer; John M Thorp; Susan M Ramin; Brian M Mercer Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Aireen Wingert; Cydney Johnson; Robin Featherstone; Meghan Sebastianski; Lisa Hartling; R Douglas Wilson Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2018-11-21 Impact factor: 3.007