Predicting successful intended vaginal delivery after previous caesarean section: External validation of two predictive models in a Dutch nationwide registration-based cohort with a high intended vaginal delivery rate

BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Volumn 121, Issue 7, 2014, Pages 840-847

  Schoorel, E N C ^a   Melman, S ^a   Van Kuijk, S M J ^a   Grobman, W A ^b   Kwee, A ^c   Mol, B W J ^d   Nijhuis, J G ^a   Smits, L J M ^a   Aardenburg, R ^e   De Boer, K ^f   Delemarre, F M C ^g   Van Dooren, I M ^h   Franssen, M T M ⁱ   Kleiverda, G ^j   Kaplan, M ^k   Kuppens, S M I ^l   Lim, Fth ^m   Sikkema, J M ^h   Smid Koopman, E ⁿ   Visser, H ^o   Vrouenraets, F P J M ^e   Woiski, M ^p   Hermens, R P M G ^p   Scheepers, H C J ^a   more..

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^d UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^e Zuyderland Medical Centre   (Netherlands)

^f RIJNSTATE HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^g ELKERLIEK HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^h Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Elkerliek Hospital ^*  (Netherlands)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^j Flevo Hospital   (Netherlands)

^k Röpcke Zweers Hospital   (Netherlands)

^l CATHARINA HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^m IJSSELLAND HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

ⁿ Ruwaard Van Putten Hospital   (Netherlands)

^o TERGOOI HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^p RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

more..

Author keywords

External validation; prediction; vaginal birth after caesarean

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; BODY MASS; CLOSE TO DELIVERY MODEL; COHORT ANALYSIS; DELIVERY; ENTRY TO CARE MODEL; ETHNICITY; FEMALE; GESTATIONAL AGE; HUMAN; LABOR INDUCTION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MATERNAL AGE; MATERNAL HYPERTENSION; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; MULTICENTER STUDY; NETHERLANDS; NONBIOLOGICAL MODEL; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REGISTRATION; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; THIRD TRIMESTER PREGNANCY; UTERINE CERVIX DILATATION; UTERINE CERVIX RIPENING; VALIDATION STUDY;

EXTERNAL VALIDATION; PREDICTION; VAGINAL BIRTH AFTER CAESAREAN;

ADULT; COHORT STUDIES; FEMALE; FORECASTING; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NETHERLANDS; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY, HIGH-RISK; VAGINAL BIRTH AFTER CESAREAN;

EID: 84901193153     PISSN: 14700328     EISSN: 14710528     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.12605     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Practice bulletin no 115: vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2010; 116: 450-63.
2. RCOG. Green-top Guideline no 45: Birth after previous caesarean birth. London: RCOG Press; 2007.
3. Grobman WA,. Rates and prediction of successful vaginal birth after cesarean. Semin Perinatol 2010; 34: 244-8.
4. Guise JM, Denman MA, Emeis C, Marshall N, Walker M, Fu R, et al. Vaginal birth after cesarean: new insights on maternal and neonatal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol 2010; 115: 1267-78.
5. McMahon MJ, Luther ER, Bowes WA Jr, Olshan AF,. Comparison of a trial of labor with an elective second cesarean section. N Engl J Med 1996; 335: 689-95.
6. Grobman WA, Lai Y, Landon MB, Spong CY, Leveno KJ, Rouse DJ, et al. Can a prediction model for vaginal birth after cesarean also predict the probability of morbidity related to a trial of labor? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009; 200: 56 e1-6.
7. Chaillet N, Bujold E, Dube E, Grobman WA,. Validation of a prediction model for predicting the probability of morbidity related to a trial of labour in Quebec. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2012; 34: 820-5.
8. Eden KB, McDonagh M, Denman MA, Marshall N, Emeis C, Fu R, et al. New insights on vaginal birth after cesarean: can it be predicted? Obstet Gynecol 2010; 116: 967-81.
9. Grobman WA, Lai Y, Landon MB, Spong CY, Leveno KJ, Rouse DJ, et al. Development of a nomogram for prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 109: 806-12.
10. Grobman WA, Lai Y, Landon MB, Spong CY, Leveno KJ, Rouse DJ, et al. Does information available at admission for delivery improve prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean? Am J Perinatol 2009; 26: 693-701.
11. Costantine MM, Fox K, Byers BD, Mateus J, Ghulmiyyah LM, Blackwell S, et al. Validation of the prediction model for success of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2009; 114: 1029-33.
12. Costantine MM, Fox KA, Pacheco LD, Mateus J, Hankins GD, Grobman WA, et al. Does information available at delivery improve the accuracy of predicting vaginal birth after cesarean? Validation of the published models in an independent patient cohort. Am J Perinatol 2011; 28: 293-8.
13. Yokoi A, Ishikawa K, Miyazaki K, Yoshida K, Furuhashi M, Tamakoshi K,. Validation of the prediction model for success of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery in Japanese women. Int J Med Sci 2012; 9: 488-91.
14. Menacker F, Declercq E, Macdorman MF,. Cesarean delivery: background, trends, and epidemiology. Semin Perinatol 2006; 30: 235-41.
15. MacDorman M, Declercq E, Menacker F,. Recent trends and patterns in cesarean and vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) deliveries in the United States. Clin Perinatol 2011; 38: 179-92.
16. Kwee A, Bots ML, Visser GH, Bruinse HW,. Obstetric management and outcome of pregnancy in women with a history of caesarean section in the Netherlands. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2007; 132: 171-6.
17. Montgomery AA, Emmett CL, Fahey T, Jones C, Ricketts I, Patel RR, et al. Two decision aids for mode of delivery among women with previous caesarean section: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2007; 334: 1305.
18. Peduzzi P, Concato J, Kemper E, Holford TR, Feinstein AR,. A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 1996; 49: 1373-9.
19. Steyerberg EW, Moons KG, van der Windt DA, Hayden JA, Perel P, Schroter S, et al. Prognosis Research Strategy (PROGRESS) 3: prog-nostic model research. PLoS Med 2013; 10: e1001381.
20. Kaimal AJ, Kuppermann M,. Understanding risk, patient and provider preferences, and obstetrical decision making: approach to delivery after cesarean. Semin Perinatol 2010; 34: 331-6.