Can a Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Delivery be a Normal Labor and Birth? Lessons from Midwifery Applied to Trial of Labor After a Previous Cesarean Delivery

Clinics in Perinatology

Volumn 38, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 247-263

  King, Tekoa L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Informed consent; Intrapartum care; Prenatal counseling; Vaginal birth after cesarean

Indexed keywords

BIRTHPLACE; CESAREAN SECTION; CONTENT ANALYSIS; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH LITERACY; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LABOR MANAGEMENT; LABOR STAGE; LABOR SUPPORT; MIDWIFE ATTITUDE; OBSTETRIC CARE; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT COUNSELING; PATIENT DECISION MAKING; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT INFORMATION; PATIENT SAFETY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; TRIAL OF LABOR; VAGINAL DELIVERY;

ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; COUNSELING; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFORMED CONSENT; MIDWIFERY; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL CARE; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; TRIAL OF LABOR; VAGINAL BIRTH AFTER CESAREAN;

EID: 79957985687     PISSN: 00955108     EISSN: 15579840     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.clp.2011.03.003     Document Type: Review

References (93)

1. Martin J.A., Hamilton B.E., Sutton P.D., et al. Births: final data for 2008. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2010, 59:1-49.
2. Zhang J., Troendle J., Reddy U.M., et al. Contemporary cesarean delivery practice in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010, 203(4). 326.e1-10.
3. Cunningham F.G., Bangdiwala S., Brown S.S., et al. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement vaginal birth after cesarean new insights March 8-10, 2010. Obstetrics & Gynecology 2010, 115(6):1279-1295.
4. Caughey A.B. Informed consent for a vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery. J Midwifery Womens Health 2009, 54(3):249-253.
5. Guise J.M., Denman M.A., Emeis C., et al. Vaginal birth after cesarean: new insights on maternal and neonatal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol 2010, 115(6):1267-1278.
6. Landon M.B. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Clin Perinatol 2008, 35(3):491-504. ix-x.
7. Gregory K.D., Fridman M., Korst L. Trends and patterns of vaginal birth after cesarean availability in the United States. Semin Perinatol 2010, 34(4):237-243.
8. DeFranco E.A., Rampersad R., Atkins K.L., et al. Do vaginal birth after cesarean outcomes differ based on hospital setting?. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007, 197(4):400.e1-400.e6.
9. Lieberman E., Ernst E.K., Rooks J.P., et al. Results of the national study of vaginal birth after cesarean in birth centers. Obstet Gynecol 2004, 104(5 Pt 1):933-942.
10. Russillo B., Sewitch M.J., Cardinal L., et al. Comparing rates of trial of labour attempts, VBAC success, and fetal and maternal complications among family physicians and obstetricians. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2008, 30(2):123-128.
11. Klagholz J., Strunk A.L. Overview of the 2009 ACOG survey on professional liability. ACOG Clin Rev 2009, 14:1-2.
12. Declercq E.R., Sakala C., Corry M.P., et al. Listening to mothers II 2006, Childbirth Connection, New York.
13. Guise J.M., Eden K., Emeis C., et al. Vaginal birth after cesarean: new insights. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep) 2010, 191:1-397.
14. Eden K.B., Hashima J.N., Osterweil P., et al. Childbirth preferences after cesarean birth: a review of the evidence. Birth 2004, 31(1):49-60.
15. Farnworth A., Robson S.C., Thomson R.G., et al. Decision support for women choosing mode of delivery after a previous caesarean section: a developmental study. Patient Educ Couns 2008, 71(1):116-124.
16. Lyerly A.D., Mitchell L.M., Armstrong E.M., et al. Risk and the pregnant body. Hastings Cent Rep 2009, 39(6):34-42.
17. Lyerly A.D., Mitchell L.M., Armstrong E.M., et al. Risks, values, and decision making surrounding pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2007, 109(4):979-984.
18. Sharma P.S., Eden K.B., Guise J.M., et al. Subjective risk vs. objective risk can lead to different post-cesarean birth decisions based on multiattribute modeling. J Clin Epidemiol 2011, 64(1):67-78.
19. Hodnett E.D., Gates S., Hofmeyr G.J., et al. Continuous support for women during childbirth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007, 3. CD003766.
20. Simkin P. Just another day in a woman's life? Part II: nature and consistency of women's long-term memories of their first birth experiences. Birth 1992, 19(2):64-81.
21. Rice F., Lewis A., Harold G., et al. Agreement between maternal report and antenatal records for a range of pre and peri-natal factors: the influence of maternal and child characteristics. Early Hum Dev 2007, 83(8):497-504.
22. Yawn B.P., Suman V.J., Jacobsen S.J. Maternal recall of distant pregnancy events. J Clin Epidemiol 1998, 51(5):399-405.
23. Waldenstrom U. Why do some women change their opinion about childbirth over time?. Birth 2004, 31(2):102-107.
24. Lobel M., DeLuca R.S. Psychosocial sequelae of cesarean delivery: review and analysis of their causes and implications. Soc Sci Med 2007, 64(11):2272-2284.
25. Redshaw M., Hockley C. Institutional processes and individual responses: women's experiences of care in relation to cesarean birth. Birth 2010, 37(2):150-159.
26. Blom E.A., Jansen P.W., Verhulst F.C., et al. Perinatal complications increase the risk of postpartum depression. The Generation R Study. BJOG 2010, 117(11):1390-1398.
27. Borders N. After the afterbirth: a critical review of postpartum health relative to method of delivery. J Midwifery Womens Health 2006, 51(4):242-248.
28. Porter M., van Teijlingen E., Chi Ying Yip L., et al. Satisfaction with cesarean section: qualitative analysis of open-ended questions in a large postal survey. Birth 2007, 34(2):148-154.
29. Moffat M.A., Bell J.S., Porter M.A., et al. Decision making about mode of delivery among pregnant women who have previously had a caesarean section: a qualitative study. BJOG 2007, 114(1):86-93.
30. David S., Fenwick J., Bayes S., et al. A qualitative analysis of the content of telephone calls made by women to a dedicated 'Next Birth After Caesarean' antenatal clinic. Women Birth 2010, 23(4):166-171.
31. Emmett C.L., Shaw A.R., Montgomery A.A., et al. Women's experience of decision making about mode of delivery after a previous caesarean section: the role of health professionals and information about health risks. BJOG 2006, 113(12):1438-1445.
32. Kaimal A.J., Kuppermann M. Understanding risk, patient and provider preferences, and obstetrical decision making: approach to delivery after cesarean. Semin Perinatol 2010, 34(5):331-336.
33. Cleary-Goldman J., Cornelisse K., Simpson L.L., et al. Previous cesarean delivery: understanding and satisfaction with mode of delivery in a subsequent pregnancy in patients participating in a formal vaginal birth after cesarean counseling program. Am J Perinatol 2005, 22(4):217-221.
34. Ridley R.T., Davis P.A., Bright J.H., et al. What influences a woman to choose vaginal birth after cesarean?. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 2002, 31(6):665-672.
35. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists ACOG practice bulletin no. 115: vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2010, 116(2 Pt 1):450-463.
36. Towle A., Godolphin W. Framework for teaching and learning informed shared decision making. BMJ 1999, 319(7212):766-771.
37. US Department of Health and Human Services Healthy people 2010: understanding and improving health 2000, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. 2nd edition.
38. Nelson W., Reyna V.F., Fagerlin A., et al. Clinical implications of numeracy: theory and practice. Ann Behav Med 2008, 35(3):261-274.
39. Powers B.J., Trinh J.V., Bosworth H.B. Can this patient read and understand written health information?. JAMA 2010, 304(1):76-84.
40. Golbeck A.L., Ahlers-Schmidt C.R., Paschal A.M., et al. A definition and operational framework for health numeracy. Am J Prev Med 2005, 29(4):375-376.
41. Lipkus I.M. Numeric, verbal, and visual formats of conveying health risks: suggested best practices and future recommendations. Med Decis Making 2007, 27(5):696-713.
42. Galesic M., Gigerenzer G., Straubinger N. Natural frequencies help older adults and people with low numeracy to evaluate medical screening tests. Med Decis Making 2009, 29(3):368-371.
43. Edwards A., Elwyn G., Mulley A. Explaining risks: turning numerical data into meaningful pictures. BMJ 2002, 324(7341):827-830.
44. Stallings S.P., Paling J.E. New tool for presenting risk in obstetrics and gynecology. Obstet Gynecol 2001, 98(2):345-349.
45. Garcia-Retamero R., Galesic M. How to reduce the effect of framing on messages about health. J Gen Intern Med 2010, 25(12):1323-1329.
46. Garcia-Retamero R., Galesic M. Communicating treatment risk reduction to people with low numeracy skills: a cross-cultural comparison. Am J Public Health 2009, 99(12):2196-2202.
47. Peters E., Hart P.S., Fraenkel L. Informing patients: the influence of numeracy, framing, and format of side effect information on risk perceptions. Med Decis Making 2010, [Epub ahead of print].
48. O'Connor A.M., Bennett C.L., Stacey D., et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009, 3. CD001431.
49. Frost J., Shaw A., Montgomery A., et al. Women's views on the use of decision aids for decision making about the method of delivery following a previous caesarean section: qualitative interview study. BJOG 2009, 116(7):896-905.
50. Montgomery A.A., Emmett C.L., Fahey T., et al. Two decision aids for mode of delivery among women with previous caesarean section: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2007, 334(7607):1305.
51. Shorten A., Shorten B., Keogh J., et al. Making choices for childbirth: a randomized controlled trial of a decision-aid for informed birth after cesarean. Birth 2005, 32(4):252-261.
52. Eden K.B., Dolan J.G., Perrin N.A., et al. Patients were more consistent in randomized trial at prioritizing childbirth preferences using graphic-numeric than verbal formats. J Clin Epidemiol 2009, 62(4):415-424. e3.
53. Rozen G., Ugoni A.M., Sheehan P.M. A new perspective on VBAC: a retrospective cohort study. Women Birth 2011, 24(1):3-9.
54. El-Sayed Y.Y., Watkins M.M., Fix M., et al. Perinatal outcomes after successful and failed trials of labor after cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007, 196(6):583.e1-583.e5. [discussion: 583, e5].
55. Oyelese Y., Ananth C.V. Placental abruption. Obstet Gynecol 2006, 108(4):1005-1016.
56. David M., Gross M.M., Wiemer A., et al. Prior cesarean section-an acceptable risk for vaginal delivery at free-standing midwife-led birth centers? Results of the analysis of vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC) in German birth centers. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2009, 142(2):106-110.
57. Albers L.L. Safety of VBACs in birth centers: choices and risks. Birth 2005, 32(3):229-231.
58. Windrim R. Vaginal delivery in birth centre after previous caesarean section. Lancet 2005, 365(9454):106-107.
59. Macdorman M.F., Declercq E., Menacker F., et al. Neonatal mortality for low-risk women by method of delivery. Birth 2007, 34(1):101-102.
60. Smith G.C., Pell J.P., Cameron A.D., et al. Risk of perinatal death associated with labor after previous cesarean delivery in uncomplicated term pregnancies. JAMA 2002, 287(20):2684-2690.
61. Leung A.S., Farmer R.M., Leung E.K., et al. Risk factors associated with uterine rupture during trial of labor after cesarean delivery: a case-control study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993, 168(5):1358-1363.
62. Avery M.D., Carr C.A., Burkhardt P. Vaginal birth after cesarean section: a pilot study of outcomes in women receiving midwifery care. J Midwifery Womens Health 2004, 49(2):113-117.
63. Kobelin C.G. Intrapartum management of vaginal birth after cesarean section. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2001, 44(3):588-593.
64. Devoe L.D., Croom C.S., Youssef A.A., et al. The prediction of " controlled" uterine rupture by the use of intrauterine pressure catheters. Obstet Gynecol 1992, 80(4):626-629.
65. Rodriguez M.H., Masaki D.I., Phelan J.P., et al. Uterine rupture: are intrauterine pressure catheters useful in the diagnosis?. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1989, 161(3):666-669.
66. Brown H.C., Paranjothy S., Dowswell T., et al. Package of care for active management in labour for reducing caesarean section rates in low-risk women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008, 4. CD004907.
67. Berghella V., Baxter J.K., Chauhan S.P. Evidence-based labor and delivery management. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008, 199(5):445-454.
68. Albers L.L. The evidence for physiologic management of the active phase of the first stage of labor. J Midwifery Womens Health 2007, 52(3):207-215.
69. Simkin P., Bolding A. Update on nonpharmacologic approaches to relieve labor pain and prevent suffering. J Midwifery Womens Health 2004, 49(6):489-504.
70. Simkin P.P., O'hara M. Nonpharmacologic relief of pain during labor: systematic reviews of five methods. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002, 186(5 Suppl Nature):S131-S159.
71. Smith C.A., Collins C.T., Cyna A.M., et al. Complementary and alternative therapies for pain management in labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006, 4. CD003521.
72. Alfirevic Z., Devane D., Gyte G.M. Continuous cardiotocography (CTG) as a form of electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) for fetal assessment during labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006, 3. CD006066.
73. Smyth R.M., Alldred S.K., Markham C. Amniotomy for shortening spontaneous labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007, 4. CD006167.
74. McNiven P.S., Williams J.I., Hodnett E., et al. An early labor assessment program: a randomized, controlled trial. Birth 1998, 25(1):5-10.
75. Sanchez-Ramos L., Bernstein S., Kaunitz A.M. Expectant management versus labor induction for suspected fetal macrosomia: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol 2002, 100(5 Pt 1):997-1002.
76. Sakala C., Corry M. Evidence-based maternity care: what it is and what it can achieve 2008, Milbank Memorial Fund, New York.
77. Brancato R.M. A meta-analysis of passive descent versus immediate pushing in nulliparous women with epidural analgesia in the second stage of labor. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 2008, 37(1):4-12.
78. Frigoletto F.D., Lieberman E., Lang J.M., et al. A clinical trial of active management of labor. N Engl J Med 1995, 333(12):745-750.
79. Selin L., Almstrom E., Wallin G., et al. Use and abuse of oxytocin for augmentation of labor. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2009, 88(12):1352-1357.
80. Wei S.Q., Luo Z.C., Qi H.P., et al. High-dose vs low-dose oxytocin for labor augmentation: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010, 203(4):296-304.
81. Jackson D.J., Lang J.M., Ecker J., et al. Impact of collaborative management and early admission in labor on method of delivery. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 2003, 32(2):147-157. [discussion: 158-60].
82. Chaillet N., Dumont A. Evidence-based strategies for reducing cesarean section rates: a meta-analysis. Birth 2007, 34(1):53-64.
83. MacDorman M.F., Singh G.K. Midwifery care, social and medical risk factors, and birth outcomes in the USA. J Epidemiol Community Health 1998, 52(5):310-317.
84. Cahill A.G., Waterman B.M., Stamilio D.M., et al. Higher maximum doses of oxytocin are associated with an unacceptably high risk for uterine rupture in patients attempting vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008, 199(1). 32, e1-5.
85. Friedman E.A. Classic pages in obstetrics and gynecology. The graphic analysis of labor. Emanuel A. Friedman. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1978, 132(7):822-823.
86. Neal J.L., Lowe N.K., Patrick T.E., et al. What is the slowest-yet-normal cervical dilation rate among nulliparous women with spontaneous labor onset?. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 2010, 39(4):361-369.
87. Khan K.S., Rizvi A. The partograph in the management of labor following cesarean section. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1995, 50(2):151-157.
88. Lavender T., Alfirevic Z., Walkinshaw S. Effect of different partogram action lines on birth outcomes: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2006, 108(2):295-302.
89. Rosenblatt R.A., Dobie S.A., Hart L.G., et al. Interspecialty differences in the obstetric care of low-risk women. Am J Public Health 1997, 87(3):344-351.
90. Jackson D.J., Lang J.M., Swartz W.H., et al. Outcomes, safety, and resource utilization in a collaborative care birth center program compared with traditional physician-based perinatal care. Am J Public Health 2003, 93(6):999-1006.
91. Hatem M., Sandall J., Devane D., et al. Midwife-led versus other models of care for childbearing women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008, 4. CD004667.
92. Harrington L.C., Miller D.A., McClain C.J., et al. Vaginal birth after cesarean in a hospital-based birth center staffed by certified nurse-midwives. J Nurse Midwifery 1997, 42(4):304-307.
93. American College of Nurse-Midwives Philosophy of the American College of Nurse-Midwives Available at:, Accessed January 11, 2011. http://www.midwife.org/philosophy.cfm.