Vaginal birth after caesarean section prediction models: A UK comparative observational study

European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology

Volumn 193, Issue , 2015, Pages 136-139

  Mone, Fionnuala ^a,b   Harrity, Conor ^c   MacKie, Adam ^b   Segurado, Ricardo ^a   Toner, Brenda ^d   McCormick, Timothy R ^e   Currie, Aoife ^e   McAuliffe, Fionnuala M ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

^b NATIONAL MATERNITY HOSPITAL   (Ireland)

^c Rosemount Hall   (Ireland)

^d ROYAL MATERNITY HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^e CRAIGAVON AREA HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Prediction; Statistical model; Trial of labor after cesarean section; Vaginal birth after cesarean section

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; BODY MASS; CESAREAN SECTION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; ETHNICITY; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; FEMALE; FETUS HEART RATE; HUMAN; MATERNAL AGE; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PREDICTION; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRENATAL PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK FACTOR; STATISTICAL MODEL; TRIAL OF LABOR; UNITED KINGDOM; VAGINAL DELIVERY; FORECASTING; NORTHERN IRELAND; PREGNANCY; PROCEDURES; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; VAGINAL BIRTH AFTER CESAREAN;

ADULT; AREA UNDER CURVE; FEMALE; FORECASTING; HUMANS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NORTHERN IRELAND; PREGNANCY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ROC CURVE; TRIAL OF LABOR; VAGINAL BIRTH AFTER CESAREAN;

EID: 84941005049     PISSN: 03012115     EISSN: 18727654     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2015.07.024     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. F. Bragg, D. Cromwell, L.C. Edoziek, and et al. Variation in rates of caesarean section among English NHS trusts after accounting for maternal and clinical risk: cross sectional study BMJ 314 2010 c5065 10.1136/bmj.c5065 http://www.bmj.com/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=20926490 [accessed 02.05.14]
2. F. Mone, C. Harrity, B. Toner, and et al. Predicting why women have elective repeat cesarean deliveries and predictors of successful vaginal birth after caesarean Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2014 10.1016/j.ijgo.2013.12.013 [Epub ahead of print]
3. L. WaLaw, M. Wah Pang, T. Kwok-Hung Chung, and et al. Randomised trial of assigned mode of delivery after a previous cesarean section - impact on maternal psychological dynamics J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 23 10 2010 1106 1111 10.3109/14767050903551434
4. A. Chung, A. Mario, Y.A. El-Sayed, and et al. Cost-effectiveness of a trial of labor after previous cesarean Obstet Gynecol 97 6 2001 932 941
5. H. deLau, H. Gremmels, N.W. Schuitemaker, and et al. Risk of uterine rupture in women undergoing trial of labour with a history of both a caesarean section and a vaginal delivery Arch Gynecol Obstet 284 5 2011 1053 1058 10.1007/s00404-011-2048-x
6. M.B. Landon, J.C. Hauth, K.J. Leveno, and et al. Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with a trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery N Engl J Med 351 25 2004 2581 2589 http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa040405 [accessed 02.05.14]
7. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Birth after previous Caesarean Birth. Guideline No. 45 2007, February http://www.rcog.org.uk/womens-health/clinical-guidance/birth-after-previous-caesarean-birth-green-top-45 [accessed 10.07.14]
8. K. Eden, M. McDonagh, and M.A. Denman New insights on vaginal birth after caesarean. Can it be predicted? Obstet Gynecol 116 4 2010 967 981 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181f2de49
9. S. Sur, K.W. Murphy, and I.Z. Mackenzie Delivery after caesarean section: consultant obstetricians' professional advice and personal preferences J Obstet Gynaecol 29 3 2009 212 216 10.1080/01443610902735785
10. M.B. Landon, J.C. Hauth, K.J. Leveno, and et al. Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with a trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery NEJM 351 25 2004 2581 2589
11. G.C. Smith, I.R. White, J.P. Pell, and et al. Predicting caesarean section and uterine rupture among women attempting vaginal birth after prior caesarean section PLoS Med 2 September (9) 2005 e252 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020252 http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.0020252 [accessed 02.05.14]
12. W. Grobman, Y. Lai, M. Landon, and et al. Development of a nomogram for prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean section Obstet Gynecol 109 4 2007 806 812
13. L. Troyer, and V. Parisi Obstetric parameters affecting success in a trial of labour Am J Obstet Gynecol 167 4 Pt 1 1992 1099 1104
14. M. Constantine, K. Fox, L. Pacheco, and et al. Does information available at delivery improve the accuracy of predicting vaginal birth after caesarean section? Validation of the published models in an independent patient cohort Am J Perinatol 28 4 2011 293 298 10.1055/s-0030-1271214
15. N. Chaillet, E. Bujold, E. Dube, and et al. Validation of a prediction model for vaginal birth after caesarean J Obstet Gynaecol Can 35 2 2013 119 124
16. A. Yokoi, K. Ishikawa, K. Miyazaki, and et al. Validation of the prediction model for success of vaginal birth after caesarean delivery in Japanese women Int J Med Sci 9 6 2012 488 491 10.7150/ijms.4682 http://www.medsci.org/v09p0488.htm [accessed 02.05.14]
17. J. Hanley, and B. McNeill The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve Radiology 143 1 1982 29 36
18. H.N. Essex, J. Green, H. Baston, and et al. Which women are at increased risk of a caesarean section or an instrumental vaginal birth in the UK: an exploration within the Millennium Cohort Study BJOG 120 6 2013 732 742 10.1111/1471-0528.12177
19. C.L. Emmet, A.A. Montgomery, D.J. Murphy DIAMOND Study Group Preferences for mode of delivery after previous caesarean section: what do women want, what do they get and how do they value outcomes? Health Expect 14 4 2011 397 404 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00635.x
20. S. Hollinghurst, C. Emmett, T.J. Peters, and et al. Economic evaluation of the DIAMOND randomized trial: cost and outcomes of 2 decision aids for mode of delivery among women with a previous cesarean section Med Decis Mak 30 4 2010 453 463 10.1177/0272989X09353195