Providers' perspective on vaginal birth after cesarean birth: a qualitative systematic review

被引:0
作者
Kanjanakaew, Antita [1 ]
Jiramanee, Atchareya [1 ]
Srimoragot, Manassawee [1 ]
机构
[1] Mahidol Univ, Fac Nursing, Dept Obstet & Gynecol Nursing, Bangkok, Thailand
关键词
VBAC; Previous Cesarean; Review; Qualitative Study; ROBSON CLASSIFICATION; WOMEN; SECTION; COUNTRIES; CARE; DELIVERIES; VIEWS;
D O I
10.1186/s12884-024-06921-1
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
BackgroundVaginal Birth after Cesarean Birth (VBAC) is a birth mode recommended for reducing repeat cesarean which potentially contributes to adverse outcomes. However, VBAC is not normally practiced in some countries. Providers are an important part of the decision-making process on modes of birth among pregnant individuals. Providers' perspective on VBAC can influence whether they support or avoid conducting VBAC. This review aimed to explore providers' perspective on VBAC.MethodsThe comprehensive search was conducted from six databases including PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Google scholar. The studies published in English between 2013 and 2023 were review. The Medical Subject Heading terms for VBAC and perspective were used to search. The eligible studies were selected by the PRISMA flow chart. The initial search yielded 558 articles. After excluding duplicates, articles not retrieved for full-text, and not meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria, eight articles were recruited. Quality appraisal of the studies was performed by the tool of the Joanna Briggs Institute. The meta-aggregation approach was applied to synthesize the findings.ResultsEight qualitative articles were included in this review, and six themes were developed including (1) different recognition of VBAC, (2) differences of willingness level of conducting Trial of Labor after Cesarean (TOLAC) (the approach attempting to have VBAC), (3) skills and resources needed when performing TOLAC, (4) protocol for recruiting candidacy and TOLAC management, (5) final decision making on VBAC, and (6) onset and duration of providing TOLAC information.ConclusionProviders play an important role in influencing individuals' decision on modes of birth. Providers' positive recognition and willingness of conducting TOLAC potentially impact successful VBAC rate. However, the lawsuit caused by adverse outcomes from TOLAC/VBAC is a main reason for choosing repeat cesarean.Trial registrationPROSPERO registration number of this systematic review: CRD42023427662. Repeat cesarean is a primary contributor to high cesarean rates globally. Vaginal Birth after Cesarean Birth (VBAC) is a vaginal birth of individuals with previous cesarean. While some countries have high successful VBAC rates, many countries have very low VBAC rates and do not support a vaginal birth in subsequent pregnancy among individuals with previous cesarean. Healthcare providers especially obstetricians and nurse-midwives play an important role in individuals' decision on mode of birth, so do individuals with previous cesarean. Healthcare providers' perspective on modes of birth among individuals with previous cesarean is very essential to support or not support individuals to have VBAC. In high VBAC rate countries, healthcare providers think VBAC is an optimal option for individuals with previous cesarean and have high confidence to do VBAC. On the other hand, healthcare providers in low VBAC rate countries think VBAC can cause a catastrophic birth outcome as uterine dehiscence and they are scared of being sued from the adverse outcome. One approach to support VBAC, most healthcare providers suggest that individuals with previous cesarean should be educated about VBAC right after the first cesarean or first antenatal visit because VBAC is not a common mode of birth for individuals in some countries and they need time to make a decision on mode of birth for their subsequent pregnancy.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 53 条
  • [1] Complications associated with higher order compared to lower order cesarean sections
    Abdelazim, Ibrahim
    Alanwar, Ahmed
    Shikanova, Svetlana
    Kanshaiym, Sakiyeva
    Farghali, Mohamed
    Mohamed, Mohamed
    Zhurabekova, Gulmira
    Karimova, Bakyt
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MATERNAL-FETAL & NEONATAL MEDICINE, 2020, 33 (14) : 2395 - 2402
  • [2] Anekpornwattana S., 2020, THAI J OBSTET GYNAEC, V28, P6, DOI [10.14456/tjog.2020.2, DOI 10.14456/TJOG.2020.2]
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2015, Birth after previous caesarean birth
  • [4] [Anonymous], 2014, Core Document: Philosophy and Model of Midwifery Care
  • [5] Cesarean section one hundred years 1920-2020: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Antoine, Clarel
    Young, Bruce K.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PERINATAL MEDICINE, 2021, 49 (01) : 5 - 16
  • [6] Trends and projections of caesarean section rates: global and regional estimates
    Betran, Ana Pilar
    Ye, Jiangfeng
    Moller, Ann-Beth
    Souza, Joao Paulo
    Zhang, Jun
    [J]. BMJ GLOBAL HEALTH, 2021, 6 (06):
  • [7] What is the optimal rate of caesarean section at population level? A systematic review of ecologic studies
    Betran, Ana Pilar
    Torloni, Maria Regina
    Zhang, Jun
    Ye, Jiangfeng
    Mikolajczyk, Rafael
    Deneux-Tharaux, Catherine
    Oladapo, Olufemi Taiwo
    Souza, Joao Paulo
    Tuncalp, Oezge
    Vogel, Joshua Peter
    Guelmezoglu, Ahmet Metin
    [J]. REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH, 2015, 12
  • [8] Is it safe to have multiple repeat cesarean sections? A high volume tertiary care center experience
    Biler, Alper
    Ekin, Atalay
    Ozcan, Aykut
    Inan, Abdurrahman Hamdi
    Vural, Tayfun
    Toz, Emrah
    [J]. PAKISTAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2017, 33 (05) : 1074 - 1079
  • [9] Factors associated with success of vaginal birth after one caesarean section (VBAC) at three teaching hospitals in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: a case control study
    Birara, Malede
    Gebrehiwot, Yirgu
    [J]. BMC PREGNANCY AND CHILDBIRTH, 2013, 13
  • [10] Planned Repeat Cesarean Section at Term and Adverse Childhood Health Outcomes: A Record-Linkage Study
    Black, Mairead
    Bhattacharya, Siladitya
    Philip, Sam
    Norman, Jane E.
    McLernon, David J.
    [J]. PLOS MEDICINE, 2016, 13 (03)