Preferred and actual delivery mode after a cesarean in London, UK

International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics

Volumn 102, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 156-159

  Selo Ojeme, Dan ^a   Abulhassan, Nashwa ^a   Mandal, Ramna ^a   Tirlapur, Seema ^a   Selo Ojeme, Uati ^b  

^a ROYAL FREE LONDON NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BENIN   (Nigeria)

Author keywords

Cesarean delivery; Mode of delivery; Repeat cesarean section; Vaginal birth after cesarean

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CAUCASIAN; CESAREAN SECTION; CHILDBIRTH; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; DELIVERY; ELECTIVE SURGERY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NATURAL CHILDBIRTH; PATIENT CARE PLANNING; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TREATMENT PLANNING; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 46749123851     PISSN: 00207292     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2008.03.008     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, Cesarean sections. Postnote 2002;(184): 1-4. www.parliament.uk/post/pn184.pdf
2. Thomas J., and Paranjothy S. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Clinical Effectiveness Support Unit. National Sentinel Cesarean Audit Report (2001), RCOG Press, London, England
3. Information Centre for Health and Social Care. NHS Maternity Statistics, England: 2004-2005 (2006), Information Centre, London
4. Liu S., Rusen I.D., Joseph K.S., Liston R., Kramer M.S., Wen S.W., et al. Recent trends in cesarean delivery rates and indications for cesarean delivery in Canada. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 26 (2004) 735-742
5. Yeh J., Wactawski-Wende J., Shelton J.A., and Reschke J. Temporal trends in the rates of trial of labor in low-risk pregnancies and their impact on the rates and success of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 194 (2006) 144
6. DiMaio H., Edwards R.K., Euliano T.Y., Treloar R.W., and Cruz A.C. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: an historic cohort cost analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 186 (2002) 890-892
7. Wilkinson C., Mcllwaine G., Boulton-Jones C., and Cole S. Is the rising cesarean section rate inevitable?. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 105 (1998) 45-52
8. McClain C.S. The making of a medical tradition: vaginal birth after cesarean. Soc Sci Med 31 2 (1990) 203-210
9. Emmett C., Shaw A., Montgomery A., Murphy D., and DiAMOND study group. Women's experience of decision making about mode of delivery after a previous cesarean section: the role of health professionals and information about health risks. BJOG 113 (2006) 1438-1445
10. Mozurkewich E.L., and Hutton E.K. Elective repeat cesarean delivery versus trial of labor: a meta-analysis of the literature from 1989 to 1999. Am J Obstet Gynecol 183 (2000) 1187-1197
11. Landon M.B., Hauth J.C., Leveno K.J., Spong C.Y., Leindecker S., Varner M.W., et al. Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with a trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery. N Engl J Med 351 (2004) 2581-2589
12. Wen S.W., Rusen I.D., Walker M., Liston R., Kramer M.S., Baskett T., et al. Comparison of maternal mortality and morbidity between trial of labor and elective cesarean section among women with previous cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 191 (2004) 1263-1269
13. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Birth after previous cesarean birth. Evidence-based Clinical Guideline Number 45 (2007), RCOG Press, London, England
14. Clark S.L., Scott J.R., Porter T.F., Schlappy D.A., McClellan V., and Burton D.A. Is vaginal birth after cesarean section less expensive than repeat cesarean delivery?. Am J Obstet Gynecol 184 (2001) 250-251
15. Grobman W.A., Peaceman A.M., and Socol M.L. Cost-effectiveness of elective repeat cesarean delivery after one low transverse cesarean. Obstet Gynecol 95 (2000) 745-751