Julieanne Chu MD, BMedSci, Hazel Keedle PhD, RM, RN, Kerry Sutcliffe PhD Candidate, MPhil, BSci, Norman Blumenthal MBBCh, FCOG(SA), FRANZCOG, Kate Levett PhD, MPH, BEd (Health) Hons
{"title":"澳大利亚一家私立医院计划进行剖腹产的妇女的结果。","authors":"Julieanne Chu MD, BMedSci, Hazel Keedle PhD, RM, RN, Kerry Sutcliffe PhD Candidate, MPhil, BSci, Norman Blumenthal MBBCh, FCOG(SA), FRANZCOG, Kate Levett PhD, MPH, BEd (Health) Hons","doi":"10.1111/birt.12811","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Rates of cesarean birth (CBs) are steadily increasing and account for 36.7% of all births in New South Wales (NSW), with primary cesareans driving the increase. NSW Health guidelines recommend women attempt a vaginal birth after a previous CB (VBAC); however, rates of VBAC are decreasing, particularly within the private hospital setting. This study aimed to determine the rates of adverse outcomes for women who planned a VBAC (pVBAC) compared with women who planned an elective repeat CB (pERCB) at one private hospital in Sydney, Australia.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>This retrospective data review evaluated patient records over a 10-year period (2010–2019). Records (<i>n</i> = 2039) were divided into four groups: pVBAC, pVBAC + EMCB, labor + ERCB (lab + ERCB), and pERCB. The incidence of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes is reported as counts and percentages. Regression and chi-squared tests were used to compare groups. Significance was determined at a <i>p</i>-value of <0.05.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Overall, very low rates (<i>N</i> = 148, 7.3%) of women had a VBAC compared with a repeat CB at this private hospital over the 10-year period. The incidence of adverse outcomes was low regardless of study group. Outcomes differed significantly between groups for postpartum hemorrhage (pERCB seven times less likely than VBAC group) and special care nursery admission (pVBAC + EMCB is 4.6 times more likely than in the VBAC group).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Overall, it is safe to attempt a VBAC at this private hospital, and labor after a cesarean should be recommended, yet very few women had a VBAC at the study site. The incidence of adverse outcomes was low compared with other published research.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55350,"journal":{"name":"Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care","volume":"51 3","pages":"571-580"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/birt.12811","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The outcomes for women planning a VBAC at a private hospital in Australia\",\"authors\":\"Julieanne Chu MD, BMedSci, Hazel Keedle PhD, RM, RN, Kerry Sutcliffe PhD Candidate, MPhil, BSci, Norman Blumenthal MBBCh, FCOG(SA), FRANZCOG, Kate Levett PhD, MPH, BEd (Health) Hons\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/birt.12811\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Rates of cesarean birth (CBs) are steadily increasing and account for 36.7% of all births in New South Wales (NSW), with primary cesareans driving the increase. NSW Health guidelines recommend women attempt a vaginal birth after a previous CB (VBAC); however, rates of VBAC are decreasing, particularly within the private hospital setting. This study aimed to determine the rates of adverse outcomes for women who planned a VBAC (pVBAC) compared with women who planned an elective repeat CB (pERCB) at one private hospital in Sydney, Australia.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Method</h3>\\n \\n <p>This retrospective data review evaluated patient records over a 10-year period (2010–2019). Records (<i>n</i> = 2039) were divided into four groups: pVBAC, pVBAC + EMCB, labor + ERCB (lab + ERCB), and pERCB. The incidence of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes is reported as counts and percentages. Regression and chi-squared tests were used to compare groups. Significance was determined at a <i>p</i>-value of <0.05.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Overall, very low rates (<i>N</i> = 148, 7.3%) of women had a VBAC compared with a repeat CB at this private hospital over the 10-year period. The incidence of adverse outcomes was low regardless of study group. Outcomes differed significantly between groups for postpartum hemorrhage (pERCB seven times less likely than VBAC group) and special care nursery admission (pVBAC + EMCB is 4.6 times more likely than in the VBAC group).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>Overall, it is safe to attempt a VBAC at this private hospital, and labor after a cesarean should be recommended, yet very few women had a VBAC at the study site. The incidence of adverse outcomes was low compared with other published research.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55350,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care\",\"volume\":\"51 3\",\"pages\":\"571-580\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/birt.12811\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/birt.12811\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Birth-Issues in Perinatal Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/birt.12811","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
The outcomes for women planning a VBAC at a private hospital in Australia
Background
Rates of cesarean birth (CBs) are steadily increasing and account for 36.7% of all births in New South Wales (NSW), with primary cesareans driving the increase. NSW Health guidelines recommend women attempt a vaginal birth after a previous CB (VBAC); however, rates of VBAC are decreasing, particularly within the private hospital setting. This study aimed to determine the rates of adverse outcomes for women who planned a VBAC (pVBAC) compared with women who planned an elective repeat CB (pERCB) at one private hospital in Sydney, Australia.
Method
This retrospective data review evaluated patient records over a 10-year period (2010–2019). Records (n = 2039) were divided into four groups: pVBAC, pVBAC + EMCB, labor + ERCB (lab + ERCB), and pERCB. The incidence of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes is reported as counts and percentages. Regression and chi-squared tests were used to compare groups. Significance was determined at a p-value of <0.05.
Results
Overall, very low rates (N = 148, 7.3%) of women had a VBAC compared with a repeat CB at this private hospital over the 10-year period. The incidence of adverse outcomes was low regardless of study group. Outcomes differed significantly between groups for postpartum hemorrhage (pERCB seven times less likely than VBAC group) and special care nursery admission (pVBAC + EMCB is 4.6 times more likely than in the VBAC group).
Conclusion
Overall, it is safe to attempt a VBAC at this private hospital, and labor after a cesarean should be recommended, yet very few women had a VBAC at the study site. The incidence of adverse outcomes was low compared with other published research.
期刊介绍:
Birth: Issues in Perinatal Care is a multidisciplinary, refereed journal devoted to issues and practices in the care of childbearing women, infants, and families. It is written by and for professionals in maternal and neonatal health, nurses, midwives, physicians, public health workers, doulas, social scientists, childbirth educators, lactation counselors, epidemiologists, and other health caregivers and policymakers in perinatal care.