Indications for,and timing of,planned caesarean section: A systematic analysis of clinical guidelines

BackgroundThere has been a worldwide rise in planned caesarean sections over recent decades, with significant variations in practice between hospitals and countries. Guidelines are known to influence clinical decision-making and, potentially, unwarranted clinical variation. The aim of this study was to review guidelines for recommendations in relation to the timing and indications for planned caesarean section as well as recommendations around the process of decision-making.MethodA systematic search of national and international English-language guidelines published between 2008 and 2018 was undertaken. Guidelines were reviewed, assessed in terms of quality and extracted independently by two reviewers.FindingsIn total, 49 guidelines of varying quality were included. There was consistency between the guidelines in potential indications for caesarean section, although guidelines vary in terms of the level of detail. There was substantial variation in timing of birth, for example recommended timing of caesarean section for women with uncomplicated placenta praevia is between 36 and 39 weeks depending on the guideline. Only 11 guidelines provided detailed guidance on shared decision-making. In general, national-level guidelines from Australia, and overseas, received higher quality ratings than regional guidelines.ConclusionThe majority of guidelines, regardless of their quality, provide very limited information to guide shared decision-making or the timing of planned caesarean section, two of the most vital aspects of guidance. National guidelines were generally of better quality than regional ones, suggesting these should be used as a template where possible and emphasis placed on improving national guidelines and minimising intra-country, regional, variability of guidelines.     

Midwifery continuity of care and vaginal birth after caesarean section: A randomised controlled trial

Problem and backgroundCaesarean section (CS) rates in Australia and many countries worldwide are high and increasing, with elective repeat caesarean section a significant contributor.AimTo determine whether midwifery continuity of care for women with a previous CS increases the proportion of women who plan to attempt a vaginal birth in their current pregnancy.MethodsA randomised controlled design was undertaken. Women who met the inclusion criteria were randomised to one of two groups; the Community Midwifery Program (CMP) (continuity across the full spectrum — antenatal, intrapartum and postpartum) (n = 110) and the Midwifery Antenatal Care (MAC) Program (antenatal continuity of care) (n = 111) using a remote randomisation service. Analysis was undertaken on an intention to treat basis. The primary outcome measure was the rate of attempted vaginal birth after caesarean section and secondary outcomes included composite measures of maternal and neonatal wellbeing.FindingsThe model of care did not significantly impact planned vaginal birth at 36 weeks (CMP 66.7% vs MAC 57.3%) or success rate (CMP 27.8% vs MAC 32.7%). The rate of maternal and neonatal complications was similar between the groups.ConclusionModel of care did not significantly impact the proportion of women attempting VBAC in this study. The similarity in the number of midwives seen antenatally and during labour and birth suggests that these models of care had more similarities than differences and that the model of continuity could be described as informational continuity. Future research should focus on the impact of relationship based continuity of care.     

Induction of labour indications and timing: A systematic analysis of clinical guidelines

BackgroundThere is widespread and some unexplained variation in induction of labour rates between hospitals. Some practice variation may stem from variability in clinical guidelines. This review aimed to identify to what extent induction of labour guidelines provide consistent recommendations in relation to reasons for, and timing of, induction of labour and ascertain whether inconsistencies can be explained by variability guideline quality.MethodWe conducted a systematic search of national and international English-language guidelines published between 2008 and 2018. General induction of labour guidelines and condition-specific guidelines containing induction of labour recommendations were searched. Guidelines were reviewed and extracted independently by two reviewers. Guideline quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II Instrument.FindingsForty nine guidelines of varying quality were included. Indications where guidelines had mostly consistent advice included prolonged pregnancy (induction between 41 and 42 weeks), preterm premature rupture of membranes, and term preeclampsia (induction when preeclampsia diagnosed ≥37 weeks). Guidelines were also consistent in agreeing on decreased fetal movements and oligohydramnios as valid indications for induction, although timing recommendations were absent or inconsistent. Common indications where there was little consensus on validity and/or timing of induction included gestational diabetes, fetal macrosomia, elevated maternal body mass index, and twin pregnancy.ConclusionSubstantial variation in clinical practice guidelines for indications for induction exists. As guidelines rated of similar quality presented conflicting recommendations, guideline variability was not explained by guideline quality. Guideline variability may partly account for unexplained variation in induction of labour rates.     

Caesarean section by country of birth in New South Wales,Australia

ObjectiveTo determine rates of caesarean section by country of birth and by obstetric risks.MethodsWe analysed the New South Wales Perinatal Data Collection data of women giving birth between January 2013 and December 2015. Obstetric risk was classified using the Robson’s 10-group classification. Multilevel logistic regression with a random intercept was used to measure the variation in caesarean section rate between immigrants from different countries and between regional immigrant groups.ResultsWe analysed data from 283,256 women, of whom 90,750 had a caesarean section (32.0%). A total of 100,120 women were born overseas (35.3%), and 33,028 (33.0%) had a caesarean section. The caesarean section rate among women from South and Central Asia ranged from 32.6% for women from Pakistan to 47.3% for women from Bangladesh. For South East Asia, women from Cambodia had the lowest caesarean section rate (19.5%) and women from Indonesia had the highest rate (37.3%). The caesarean section rate for North Africa and the Middle East ranged from 28.0% for women from Syria to 50.1% for women from Iran. Robson groups that accounted for most of the caesarean sections were women who had previous caesarean section (36.5%); nulliparous women, induced or caesarean section before labour (26.2%); and nulliparous women, spontaneous labour (8.9%).ConclusionsThe caesarean section rate varied significantly between women from different countries of birth within the same region. Women from some countries of birth had the higher caesarean section rates in some Robson groups.     

Getting the first birth right: A retrospective study of outcomes for low-risk primiparous women receiving standard care versus midwifery model of care in the same tertiary hospital

BackgroundThere is national and international concern for increasing obstetric intervention in childbirth and rising caesarean section rates. Repeat caesarean section is a major contributing factor, making primiparous women an important target for strategies to reduce unnecessary intervention and surgeries in childbirth.AimThe aim was to compare outcomes for a cohort of low risk primiparous women who accessed a midwifery continuity model of care with those who received standard public care in the same tertiary hospital.MethodsA retrospective comparative cohort study design was implemented drawing on data from two databases held by a tertiary hospital for the period 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2011. Categorical data were analysed using the chi-squared statistic and Fisher's exact test. Continuous data were analysed using Student's t-test. Comparisons are presented using unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and p-values with significance set at 0.05.ResultsData for 426 women experiencing continuity of midwifery care and 1220 experiencing standard public care were compared. The study found increased rates of normal vaginal birth (57.7% vs. 48.9% p = 0.002) and spontaneous vaginal birth (38% vs. 22.4% p = <0.001) and decreased rates of instrumental birth (23.5% vs. 28.5% p = 0.050) and caesarean sections (18.8% vs. 22.5% p = 0.115) in the midwifery continuity cohort. There were also fewer interventions in this group. No differences were found in neonatal outcomes.ConclusionStrategies for reducing caesarean section rates and interventions in childbirth should focus on primiparous women as a priority. This study demonstrates the effectiveness of continuity midwifery models, suggesting that this is an important strategy for improving outcomes in this population.     

Qualitative assessment of women's experiences with ECV

For women with unsuccessful ECV, discussions about their mode of delivery should include the benefits and risks of a planned caesarean or vaginal breech birth. However, most obstetric units continue to offer only planned caesarean births when ECVs are unsuccessful despite the proven safety of vaginal breech births in selected patients. Such unit policies can be at variance with a woman's desire and preference for vaginal birth. Thus, a conflict situation arises that could have varying medical, emotional and cultural implications.AimTo provide a consumer perspective on ECV from women who had an unsuccessful procedure.MethodologyA qualitative study involving focus group discussions with women who had unsuccessful ECV at secondary obstetric facility in Melbourne, Australia.ResultsEmergent themes from the focus group discussions were related to emotions associated with the inevitability of a caesarean section for breech, consequences of an unsuccessful ECV and the various activities undertaken by women to induce spontaneous version.ConclusionA medicalized approach to ECV fell short of women's expectations of care. There is a need to develop strategies that will help women deal with any conflicts occasioned by an unsuccessful ECV.     

Using epidemiological and health economic measures to inform maternity staffing decisions: A guide

BackgroundThere is growing concern around unnecessary intervention (particularly caesarean section) at birth in high-income countries. Caseload midwifery care aims to offset this, but is perceived to be costly to health services.AimTo use epidemiological and health economic techniques to estimate health outcomes and cost-savings of different levels of equivalent full time (EFT) midwives working in caseload midwifery care.MethodsTwo simulations were conducted — one assuming 10 EFT midwives working in a caseload model, with 35 women per caseload, and one assuming 50 EFT midwives working in a caseload model, with 45 women per caseload. Both were based on a sample of 5000 women. The main model inputs included rates of health outcomes for women (caesarean section, epidural anaesthesia, and episiotomy) and infants (low birthweight and admissions to special care nursery (SCN) or neonatal intensive care unit (NICU)), and the cost savings associated with health outcome avoidance.FindingsThe first simulation estimated 27 fewer caesarean sections, 12 fewer epidurals, 12 fewer episiotomies, 10 fewer low birthweight births, and 23 fewer infants admitted to SCN or NICU annually, at a total cost saving of AU$1,874,715. The second simulation estimated 173 fewer caesarean sections, 76 fewer epidurals, 76 fewer episiotomies, 65 fewer low birthweight births, and 150 fewer infants admitted to SCN or NICU annually, at a total cost saving of AU$12,051,741.ConclusionThis study provides local-level decision-makers with a decision-tool to calculate the potentially avoidable health outcomes and cost savings associated with implementing caseload midwifery care in their own service.     

Women’s experiences of intrapartum care and recovery in relation to planned caesarean sections: An interview study

Problem and backgroundApproximately one third of women in high-income countries give birth by caesarean section (CS). Better understanding of women’s CS experiences is vital in identifying opportunities to improve women’s experience of care.AimTo identify opportunities for service improvement by investigating Australian women’s experiences of care and recovery when undergoing a planned CS.MethodsQualitative telephone interview study with 33 women who had a planned CS at one of eight Australian hospitals. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to elicit women’s perspectives, experiences and beliefs surrounding their planned CS. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed inductively using NVivo-12.ResultsWomen’s experiences of CS care were mixed. Regarding intrapartum care, many women stated their planned CS was a positive experience compared to a previous emergency CS, but was scarier and more medicalised compared to vaginal birth. CS recovery was viewed more negatively, with women feeling unprepared. They reported disliking how CS recovery restricted their role as a mother, wanting more time in hospital, and greater support and continuity of care.DiscussionWomen reported largely positive intrapartum experiences of planned CS but relatively negative experiences of CS recovery. They wished for time in hospital and support from staff during recovery, and continuity of care.ConclusionBy incorporating shared decision-making antenatally, clinicians can discuss women’s birth expectations with them and better prepare them for their planned CS and recovery.     

Giving birth after caesarean: Identifying shared preferences among pregnant women using Q methodology

BackgroundCaesarean rates are rising worldwide, the main contributor being the elective repeat caesarean. During the past decades, rates of vaginal birth after caesarean dropped considerably. This requires insight in women’s preferences regarding giving birth following a previous caesarean.AimTo gain a better understanding of women’s values and preferences regarding the upcoming birth following a previous caesarean. Using Q methodology, this study systematically explores and categorises their preferences.MethodsQ methodology is an innovative research approach to explore and compare a variety of viewpoints on a certain subject. Thirty-one statements on birth after caesarean were developed based on the health belief model. Thirty-six purposively sampled pregnant women with a history of caesarean ranked these statements from least to most important. By-person factor analysis was used to identify patterns which, supplemented with interview data, were interpreted as preferences.FindingsThree distinct preferences for giving birth after a caesarean were found; (a) “Minimise the risks for me and my child”, giving priority to professional advice and risk of adverse events, (b) “Seek the benefits of normal birth”, desiring to give birth as normal as possible for both emotional and practical reasons, (c) “Opt for repeat caesarean”, expressing the belief that a planned caesarean brings comfort.ConclusionsPreferences for birth after caesarean vary considerably among pregnant women. The findings help to understand the different types of information valued by women who need to decide on their mode of birth after a first caesarean.     

Taking the reins: A grounded theory study of women's experiences of negotiating water immersion for labour and birth after a previous caesarean section

BackgroundWomen seeking a vaginal birth after a caesarean section (VBAC) frequently want to keep their subsequent labour and birth free from intervention. Water immersion (WI) during labour is potentially an effective tool for women having a VBAC for its natural pain-relieving properties. However, negotiating access to WI can be difficult, especially in the context of VBAC.AimTo explore women's experiences of negotiating WI for labour and birth in the context of VBAC.MethodologyThis Grounded Theory study followed Strauss and Corbin's framework and analytic process. Twenty-five women planning or using WI for their VBAC labour or birth were recruited from two midwifery practices and a social media group across Australia. Participants were interviewed during pregnancy and/or postnatally.Findings‘Taking the reins’, the core category explaining the women’s experiences of assuming authority over their birth, comprised five categories: ‘Robbed of my previous birth experience’; ‘My eyes were opened’; ‘Water is my tool for a successful VBAC’; ‘Actioning my choices and rights for WI’, and ‘Empowered to take back control’. ‘Wanting natural and normal’ was the driving force behind women’s desire to birth vaginally. Two mediating factors: Having someone in your corner and Rules for birth facilitated or hindered their birth choices, respectively.ConclusionThe women became active participants in their healthcare by seeking information and options to keep their birth experience natural and normal. Support from other women and advocacy in the form of continuity of midwifery care was crucial in successfully negotiating WI for their VBAC when navigating the complex health system.     

Self reported fear of childbirth and its association with women's birth experience and mode of delivery: A longitudinal population-based study

ObjectiveTo explore fear of childbirth (FOC) during pregnancy and one year after birth and its association to birth experience and mode of delivery.DesignA longitudinal population-based study.PopulationPregnant women who were listed for a routine ultrasound at three hospitals in the middle-north part of Sweden.MethodDifferences between women who reported FOC and who did not were calculated using risk ratios with a 95% confidence interval. In order to explain which factors were most strongly associated to suffer from FOC during pregnancy and one year after childbirth, multivariate logistic regression analyses were used.ResultsFOC during pregnancy in multiparous women was associated with a previous negative birth experience (RR 5.1, CI 2.5–10.4) and a previous emergency caesarean section (RR 2.5, CI 1.2–5.4). Associated factors for FOC one year after childbirth were: a negative birth experience (RR 10.3, CI 5.1–20.7), fear of childbirth during pregnancy (RR 7.1, CI 4.4–11.7), emergency caesarean section (RR 2.4, CI 1.2–4.5) and primiparity (RR 1.9, CI 1.2–3.1).ConclusionFOC was associated with negative birth experiences. Women still perceived the birth experience as negative a year after the event. Women's perception of the overall birth experience as negative seems to be more important for explaining subsequent FOC than mode of delivery. Maternity care should focus on women's experiences of childbirth. Staff at antenatal clinics should ask multiparous women about their previous experience of childbirth. So that FOC is minimized, research on factors that create a positive birth experience for women is required.     

Analysis of the caesarean section rate using the 10-Group Robson classification at Benha University Hospital,Egypt

BackgroundEgypt has the third highest caesarean section rate (54%) in the world and lacks a standard classification system to analyse caesarean section rates. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends the Robson classification as an effective caesarean section analysis and monitoring tool.AimTo analyse the caesarean section rate of Benha University Hospital, Egypt using the standard 10-Group Robson classification system.MethodA prospective, cross-sectional study was conducted at the Benha University Hospital from 1 April to 30 June 2018. All women admitted for childbirth were categorised into Robson groups to determine the absolute and relative contribution made by each group to the overall caesarean section rate. Epi Data V.3.1 software programme was used to analyse the data.Findings850 women gave birth during the study period, 466 (55%) by caesarean section (CS). Robson Group 5 (multiparous, term, cephalic presentation and previous caesarean section) contributed the most (36%) to the overall CS rate. 175/308 (56%) women in this group had previously undergone one caesarean section. Group 6 (all nulliparous women with single breech pregnancy) and Group10 (cephalic preterm pregnancies) were the second and the third greatest contributors toward the overall CS rate, with 4.6% and 2.8% respectively.ConclusionsIn keeping with other studies, Groups 5, 6, and 10 were the main contributors to the overall caesarean section rate. We found Robson classification to be clinically relevant and an effective tool to analyse the caesarean section rate even in settings with limited resources.     

Exploring outcomes for women and neonates having skin-to-skin contact during caesarean birth: A quasi-experimental design and qualitative study

ProblemWomen having an elective caesarean birth are often separated from their babies at birth with newborns transferred to a postnatal ward with the significant other.BackgroundTwo midwives were employed in 2019 to provide skin-to-skin contact for women who planned for elective caesarean births in a public hospital in metropolitan New South Wales with 4000 births per year and a 39% CB rate (57.8% of these births being elective).AimTo compare the outcomes for women and their newborns on the effects of skin-to-skin contact at elective caesarean births within the first five minutes of birth to those who did not have skin-to-skin contact and to explore the lived experiences of women having skin-to-skin contact during their elective caesarean births.MethodsA quasi-experimental design study with a qualitative component of in-depth interviews. Quantitative analyses included independent t-tests, chi square and logistic regression. Thematic analysis was used for the qualitative data.FindingsIn the quantitative results, there was a reduction in the time to the first feed (t(100) = ?11.32, p < 0.001) (M = 38.9, SE = 20.7) (M = 124.9, SE = 50.1) and the first breastfeed (t(100) = ?5.2, p < 0.001) (M = 53.2, SE = 82.5) (M = 277, SE = 295.8) with increased breastfeeding on discharge for women that had skin-to-skin contact at caesarean birth in comparison to those who did not receive skin-to-skin contact χ2(1) = 10.22, p < 0.05. In the qualitative results, women who had skin-to-skin contact during their caesarean birth had a positive experience with improved bonding and reported less anxiety and depression than their previous caesarean birth.ConclusionThis study provides evidence of the benefits of skin-to-skin contact during a caesarean birth.     

Fear of birth: Prevalence,counselling and method of birth at five obstetrical units in Norway

BackgroundThere is increasing evidence that fear of birth can have long-term effects on the childbearing woman and the method of birth.AimTo examine differences between five hospitals in Norway in the occurrence of fear of birth, counselling received and method of birth.MethodSource data was from the Norwegian cohort of the Bidens study and retrieved through a questionnaire and electronic patient records from five different hospitals in Oslo, Drammen, Tromsø, Ålesund and Trondheim, which included 2145 women. The Wijma Delivery Expectancy Questionnaire measured fear of birth, and a cut-off of ≥85 was used to define fear of birth.ResultsIn total, 12% of the women reported fear of birth, with no significant differences between the different units. A total of 8.7% received counselling according to hospital obstetrical records, varying significantly from 5.7% in Drammen to 12.7% in Oslo. Only 24.9% of the women with fear of birth had counselling at their hospital. All the units provided counselling for women with fear, but the content varied. Overarching aims included helping women develop coping strategies like writing a birth plan and clearing up issues regarding prior births. A secondary objective was to prevent unnecessary caesarean section. Both primi- and multiparous women who reported fear of birth had a twofold increased risk of a planned caesarean section.ConclusionThere were no differences between five Norwegian hospitals regarding the occurrence of fear of birth. Counselling methods, resources, level of commitment and the number of women who received counselling varied; thus, hospital practices differed.     

Conceptual and ethical problems underpinning calls to abandon vaginal breech birth

The view that vaginal breech birth is unjustifiable due to neonatal safety concerns has resulted in continued calls for breech pregnancies to be managed via a policy of planned caesarean birth. Vaginal breech birth has of course always occurred, but women with term breech pregnancies who seek to have a vaginal birth often face coercive pressures to have a caesarean birth instead. In this paper I argue that even if there is population level evidence that vaginal birth is relatively riskier for the breech presenting fetus, implementing a policy of planned caesarean birth would essentially be an unjustified attempt at forced medical intervention upon women. Advocates of a policy of planned caesarean birth often conflate the acceptability of allocating participants to a treatment group (policy) within the context of a randomized controlled trial with the justifiability of doing that as part of individual health care. Calls for obstetricians to “abandon vaginal breech birth” mistakenly position vaginal breech birth itself as a form of medical intervention that can simply be removed as an option for women by obstetricians. In reality, abandoning vaginal breech birth would entail abandoning women by denying them access to healthcare options that are otherwise available to any woman having a vaginal birth.