Literature DB >> 7457528

Evaluation of elective repeat cesarean section as a standard of care: an application of decision analysis.

K K Shy, J P LoGerfo, L E Karp.   

Abstract

The rationale for routine repeat cesarean section (RCS) is avoidance of uterine rupture during labor. However, the incidence of uterine rupture following modern cesarean section is low, and the charge for cesarean section is greater than that for a trial of labor (TOL). The technique of decision analysis was used to investigate strategies of elective RCS and TOL with precautionary monitoring. Hypothetical cohorts of 10,000 pregnant women with previous low-transverse cesarean incisions were assumed. Probability data were obtained from the literature. In the TOL cohort, 6,623 patients were delivered vaginally. Uterine rupture occurred in 73 patients. In spite of this, TOL resulted in 37 fewer perinatal deaths and 0.7 fewer maternal deaths than elective RCS. The excessive perinatal mortality in the RCS cohort was related to iatrogenic prematurity that is now avoidable with the lecithin/sphingomyelin test. Direct costs were $5 million greater in the RCS cohort. We concluded that in contemporary practice mortality rates are essentially equal for both delivery practices. However, substantial cost savings are available with TOL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1981        PMID: 7457528     DOI: 10.1016/0002-9378(81)90432-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  6 in total

1.  VBAC: Is It Safe for Your Patients?

Authors:  A J Reid
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1986-10       Impact factor: 3.275

2.  Preferences for mode of delivery after previous caesarean section: what do women want, what do they get and how do they value outcomes?

Authors:  Clare L Emmett; Alan A Montgomery; Deirdre J Murphy
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2010-09-23       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Trial of labor versus elective repeat cesarean section for the women with a previous cesarean section: a decision analysis.

Authors:  J H Chuang; R A Jenders
Journal:  Proc AMIA Symp       Date:  1999

4.  Decision-making about mode of delivery after previous caesarean section: development and piloting of two computer-based decision aids.

Authors:  Clare L Emmett; Deirdre J Murphy; Roshni R Patel; Tom Fahey; Claire Jones; Ian W Ricketts; Peter Gregor; Maureen Macleod; Alan A Montgomery
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 3.377

5.  Charges for comprehensive obstetric care at teaching and nonteaching hospitals. A comparison.

Authors:  G S Gordon; S E Sefcik; J P Lo Gerfo
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  1991-12

6.  Explaining variations in cesarean section rates: patients, facilities or policies?

Authors:  G M Anderson; J Lomas
Journal:  Can Med Assoc J       Date:  1985-02-01       Impact factor: 8.262

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.