Factors associated with vaginal birth after previous cesarean section in Brazilian women

Revista Panamericana de Salud Publica/Pan American Journal of Public Health

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 107-113

  Guilherme Cecatti, José ^a,b   Besteti Pires, Helaine Maria ^a   Faúndes, Aníbal ^a   Duarte Osis, Maria José ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMPINAS   (Brazil)

^b Center for Research in Maternal and Child Health of Campinas ^*  (Brazil)

^c Center for Mother and Child Research of Campinas   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Cesarean section; Risk factors; Trial of labor; Vaginal birth after cesarean

Indexed keywords

PREGNANCY;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BRAZIL; BREECH EXTRACTION; CALCULATION; CASE CONTROL STUDY; CESAREAN SECTION; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CULTURAL FACTOR; DATA ANALYSIS; DELIVERY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MATERNAL AGE; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; POPULATION RESEARCH; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; RISK FACTOR; SOCIAL ASPECT; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; TWIN PREGNANCY; VAGINAL DELIVERY;

EID: 24344440196     PISSN: 10204989     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1590/s1020-49892005000700005     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Katz VL, Cefalo RC. History and evolution of cesarean delivery. In: Phelan JP, Clark SL, eds. Cesarean Delivery. New York: Elsevier Science; 1988:1-18.
2. Shearer E. Cesarean section: medical benefits and costs. Soc Sci Med 1993;37:1223-31.
3. Faúndes A, Cecatti JG. Which policy for Caesarian sections in Brazil? An analysis of trends and consequences. Health Policy Plan 1993;8: 33-42.
4. Sachs BP, Yeh J, Acker D, Driscoll S, Brown DAJ, Jewett JF. Cesarean section related maternal mortality in Massachusets, 1954-1985. Obstet Gynecol 1988;71:385.
5. Petitti D, Cefalo RC, Shapiro BA, Whalley P. In-hospital maternal mortality in the United States: time trends and relation to method of delivery. Obstet Gynecol 1982;59:6-12.
6. Rosen MG, Dickinson JCB, Westhoff CL. Vaginal birth after cesarean: a meta analysis of morbidity and mortality. Obstet Gynecol 1991;77:465-70.
7. Menacker F, Curtin SC. Trends in cesarean birth and vaginal birth after previous cesarean, 1991-99. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2001; 49(13):1-16.
8. Flamm BL. Vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC). Best Pract Res Clin Gynaecol 2001; 15(1):81-92.
9. Paul RH, Miller DA. Cesarean birth: how to reduce the rate. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 172:1903-11.
10. Bais JM, van der Borden DM, Pel M, Bonsel GJ, Eskes M, van der Slikke HJ, et al. Vaginal birth after cesarean section in a population with a low overall caesarean section rate. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2001;96(2): 158-62.
11. Holt VL, Mueller BA. Attempt and success rates for vaginal birth after caesarean section in relation to complications of the previous pregnancy. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 1997; 11(Suppl 1):63-72.
12. Barros FC, Vaughan JP, Victora CG. Why so many caesarean sections? The need for a further policy change in Brazil. Health Policy Planning 1986;1:19-29.
13. Chacham AS, Perpétue MIO. The incidence of caesarean deliveries in Belo Horizonte, Brazil: Social and Economic Determinants. Reproductive Health Matters 1998;6(11):115-121.
14. Besteti Pires HM, Cecatti JG, Faundes A. Fatores associados à prova de trabalho de parto em primípares com uma cesárea anterior [Factors associated to the trial of labor among primipara women with one previous Cesarean section]. Rev Saude Publ 1999;33(4): 342-8.
15. Stafford RS. The impact of non-clinical factors on repeat cesarean section. JAMA 1991;265: 59-63.
16. Ridley RT, Davis PA, Bright JH, Sinclair D. What influences a woman to choose vaginal birth after cesarean? J Obstet Gynecol Neonatol Nurs 2002;31(6):665-72.
17. Goldman G, Pineault R, Potvin L, Blais R, Bilodeau H. Factors influencing the practice of vaginal birth after cesarean section. Am J Public Health 1993;83:1104-8.
18. Barros FC, Vaughan JP, Victora CG, Huttly SRA. Epidemic of Caesarean sections in Brazil. The Lancet 1991;338:167-9.
19. Rattner D. Sobre a hipótese de estabilização das taxas de cesárea do Estado de São Paulo, Brasil [On the hypothesis of cesarean birth rate stabilization in southeastern, Brazil]. Rev Saúde Publica 1996;30:19-33.
20. Potter JE, Berquo E, Perpétue IHO, Leal OF, Hopkins K, Souza MR, et al. Unwanted caesarean sections among public and private patients in Brazil: prospective study. BMJ 2001; 323:1155-8.
21. Wagner CL, Metts AK. Rates of successful vaginal delivery after cesarean for patients with private versus public insurance. J Perinatol 1999;19(1):14-8.
22. Hueston WJ. Site-to-site variation in the factors affecting cesarean section rates. Arch Fam Med 1995;4:346-51.
23. Hueston WJ, Rudy M. Factors predicting elective repeat cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 1994;83:741-4.
24. Gonen R, Tamir A, Degani S, Ohel G. Variables associated with successful vaginal birth after one cesarean section: a proposed vaginal birth after cesarean section score. Am J Perinatol 2004;21(8):447-53.
25. Troyer LR, Parisi VM. Obstetric parameters affecting success in a trial of labor: designation of a scoring system. Obstet Gynecol 1992; 167:1099-104.
26. Dodd J, Crowther C. Vaginal birth after Caesarean versus elective repeat Caesarean for women with a single prior Caesarean birth: a systematic review of the literature. Aust NZJ Obstet Gynecol 2004;44(5):387-91.
27. Durnwald C, Mercer B. Vaginal birth after Cesarean delivery: predicting success, risks of failure. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2004; 15(6):388-93.
28. Van der Walt WA, Cronjé HS, Bam RH. Vaginal delivery after one cesarean section. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1994;46:271-7.
29. Stedman CM, Scudder SR, Joseph GF. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: a group practice's approach to minimizing failed trial of labor. Prim Care Update Obstet Gynecol 1998; 5(4):187-8.
30. Sen S, Malik S, Salhan S. Ultrasonographic evaluation of lower uterine segment thickness in patients of previous cesarean section. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2004;87(3):215-9.