OBJECTIVE: To determine (a) the proportion of women undergoing elective repeat cesarean section without a trial of labour who were eligible for such a trial by the 1986 guidelines of the panel of the National Consensus Conference on Aspects of Cesarean Birth, (b) whether vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC) was discussed with these women and (c) the reasons cited for not having a trial of labour. DESIGN: Chart audit. SETTING: Level 2 perinatal care centre in a general teaching hospital. PATIENTS: All 313 women with a history of previous cesarean section who gave birth at the centre during 1989. RESULTS: Only 93 (30%) of the 313 women underwent a trial of labour. According to the 1986 guidelines 71% were eligible. A further 13% would have been eligible according to the revised 1991 guidelines. Of the 220 women who underwent elective repeat cesarean section, only 24 (11%) had a discussion of VBAC noted in their hospital charts. However, of all 117 patients whose charts indicated discussion of VBAC 93 (79%) chose to try it. Most of the women had either questionable indications or no indication noted for undergoing repeat cesarean section. CONCLUSION: Most of the women who underwent repeat cesarean section were eligible for a trial of labour. However, few charts noted a discussion of VBAC. Further physician and patient education is necessary to promote the appropriate use of VBAC and repeat cesarean section.
OBJECTIVE: To determine (a) the proportion of women undergoing elective repeat cesarean section without a trial of labour who were eligible for such a trial by the 1986 guidelines of the panel of the National Consensus Conference on Aspects of Cesarean Birth, (b) whether vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC) was discussed with these women and (c) the reasons cited for not having a trial of labour. DESIGN: Chart audit. SETTING: Level 2 perinatal care centre in a general teaching hospital. PATIENTS: All 313 women with a history of previous cesarean section who gave birth at the centre during 1989. RESULTS: Only 93 (30%) of the 313 women underwent a trial of labour. According to the 1986 guidelines 71% were eligible. A further 13% would have been eligible according to the revised 1991 guidelines. Of the 220 women who underwent elective repeat cesarean section, only 24 (11%) had a discussion of VBAC noted in their hospital charts. However, of all 117 patients whose charts indicated discussion of VBAC 93 (79%) chose to try it. Most of the women had either questionable indications or no indication noted for undergoing repeat cesarean section. CONCLUSION: Most of the women who underwent repeat cesarean section were eligible for a trial of labour. However, few charts noted a discussion of VBAC. Further physician and patient education is necessary to promote the appropriate use of VBAC and repeat cesarean section.