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.     

Vaginal birth after caesarean: Views of women from countries with low VBAC rates

Problem and background

Vaginal birth after caesarean section is a safe option for the majority of women. Seeking women’s views can be of help in understanding factors of importance for achieving vaginal birth in countries where the vaginal birth rates after caesarean is low.

How obstetricians and pregnant women decide mode of birth in light of a recent regulation in Brazil

Background

In Brazil, 88% of births among women with private insurance are caesarean sections, even though a caesarean rate above 15% is associated with greater maternal and child morbidity and mortality. Aiming to reduce unnecessary caesarean sections in the private sector, in July 2015 the Brazilian government enacted Resolução Normativa 368, a regulation requiring the use of partograms, pre-natal cards to document pregnancies, and consent forms for elective caesareans, and recommending that obstetricians provide women with an informational letter about birth.

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.     

Comparing the course of anxiety in women receiving their first or repeated caesarean section: A prospective cohort study

BackgroundAround 30% of births are through caesarean section and repetition rates for receiving a caesarean section are high.AimThe aim of the prospective study was to compare the course of anxiety in women undergoing their first caesarean section and women experiencing a repeated caesarean section.Participants304 women with an indication for an elective caesarean section took part. 155 received their first caesarean section and 149 received a repeated caesarean section.MethodsIn order to measure the course of anxiety on the day of the caesarean section subjective anxiety levels were measured and saliva samples for cortisol determination were taken at admission, during skin closure and two hours after the surgery. Blood pressure and heart rate were documented at skin incision and skin closure.ResultsWomen experiencing their first caesarean section displayed significantly higher anxiety levels compared to women with a repeated caesarean section. Scores of the STAI-State and visual analogue scale for anxiety differed significantly at admission (p = .006 and p < .001) and heart rate and alpha amylase levels were significantly higher at skin closure (p = .027 and p = .029).ConclusionThe results show that previous experience with a caesarean section has a soothing effect. The study aims to sensitize surgeons, anesthetists, nurses and midwives when treating women receiving a caesarean section and encourage them to incorporate soothing interventions, especially for women receiving their first caesarean section to reduce anxiety levels and consequently improve postoperative recovery and patients’ satisfaction.     

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.     

The cost of vaginal birth at home,in a birth centre or in a hospital setting in New South Wales: A micro-costing study

BackgroundWomen want greater choice of place of birth in New South Wales, Australia. It is perceived to be more costly to health services for women with a healthy pregnancy to give birth at home or in a birth centre. It is not known how much it costs the health service to provide care for women planning to give birth in these settings.AimThe aim of this study was to determine the direct cost of giving birth vaginally at home, in a birth centre or in a hospital for women at low risk of complications, in New South Wales.MethodsA micro-costing design was used. Observational (time and motion) and resource use data collection was undertaken to identify the staff time and resources required to provide care in a public hospital, birth centre or at home for women with a healthy pregnancy.FindingsThe median cost of providing care for women who plan to give birth at home, in a birth centre and in a hospital were similar (AUD $2150.07, $2100.59 and $2097.30 respectively). Midwifery time was the largest contributor to the cost of birth at home, and overhead costs accounted for over half of the total cost of BC and hospital birth. The cost of consumables was low in all three settings.ConclusionIn this study, we have found there is little difference in the cost to the health service when a woman has an uncomplicated vaginal birth at home, in a birth centre or in a hospital setting.     

Using a pregnancy decision support program for women choosing birth after a previous caesarean in Japan: A mixed methods study

Background

Opportunities for women and providers to use decision aids and share decisions about birth after caesarean in practice are currently limited in Japan. This is despite known benefits of decision aids to support value-sensitive healthcare decisions.

Exploring unwarranted clinical variation: The attitudes of midwives and obstetric medical staff regarding induction of labour and planned caesarean section

BackgroundUnexplained clinical variation is a major issue in planned birth i.e. induction of labour and planned caesarean section.AimTo map attitudes and knowledge of maternity care professionals regarding indications for planned birth, and assess inter-professional (midwifery versus medical) and intra-professional variation.MethodsA custom-created survey of medical and midwifery staff at eight Sydney hospitals. Staff were asked to rate their level of agreement with 45 “evidence-based” statements regarding caesareans and inductions on a five-point Likert scale. Responses were grouped by profession, and comparisons made of inter- and intra-professional responses.FindingsTotal 275 respondents, 78% midwifery and 21% medical. Considerable inter- and intra-professional variation was noted, with midwives generally less likely to consider any of the planned birth indications “valid” compared to medical staff. Indications for induction with most variation in midwifery responses included maternal characteristics (age≥40, obesity, ethnicity) and fetal macrosomia; and for medical personnel in-vitro fertilisation, maternal request, and routine induction at 39 weeks gestation. Indications for caesarean with most variation in midwifery responses included previous lower segment caesarean section, previous shoulder dystocia, and uncomplicated breech; and for medical personnel uncomplicated dichorionic twins. Indications with most inter-professional variation were induction at 41+ weeks versus 42+ weeks and cesarean for previous lower segment caesarean section.DiscussionBoth inter- and intra-professional variation in what were considered valid indications reflected inconsistency in underlying evidence and/or guidelines.ConclusionGreater focus on interdisciplinary education and consensus, as well as on shared decision-making with women, may be helpful in resolving these tensions.     

Lived experiences of the partners of COVID-19 positive childbearing women: A qualitative study

ProblemSeveral maternity units worldwide have rapidly put in place changes to maternity care pathways and restrictive preventive measures in the attempt to limit the spread of COVID-19, resulting in birth companions often not being allowed to be present at birth and throughout hospital admission.BackgroundThe WHO strongly recommends that the emotional, practical, advocacy and health benefits of having a chosen birth companion are respected and accommodated, including women with suspected, likely or confirmed COVID-19.AimTo explore the lived experiences of the partners of COVID-19 positive childbearing women who gave birth during the first pandemic wave (March and April 2020) in a Northern Italy maternity hospital.MethodsA qualitative study using an interpretive phenomenological approach was undertaken. Audio-recorded semi-structured interviews were conducted with 14 partners. Thematic data analysis was conducted using NVivo software. Ethical approval was obtained from the relevant Ethics Committee prior to commencing the study.FindingsThe findings include five main themes: (1) emotional impact of the pandemic; (2) partner and parent: a dual role; (3) not being present at birth: a ‘denied’ experience; (4) returning to ‘normality’; (5) feedback to ‘pandemic’ maternity services and policies.Discussion and conclusionKey elements of good practice to promote positive childbirth experiences in the context of a pandemic were identified: presence of a birth companion; COVID-19 screening tests for support persons; timely, proactive and comprehensive communication of information to support persons; staggered hospital visiting times; follow-up of socio-psychological wellbeing; antenatal and postnatal home visiting; family-centred policies and services.     

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.