Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Más filtros

Bases de datos
Tipo del documento
Revista
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Birth ; 2024 Jan 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38212947

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Rates of cesarean birth (CBs) are steadily increasing and account for 36.7% of all births in New South Wales (NSW), with primary cesareans driving the increase. NSW Health guidelines recommend women attempt a vaginal birth after a previous CB (VBAC); however, rates of VBAC are decreasing, particularly within the private hospital setting. This study aimed to determine the rates of adverse outcomes for women who planned a VBAC (pVBAC) compared with women who planned an elective repeat CB (pERCB) at one private hospital in Sydney, Australia. METHOD: This retrospective data review evaluated patient records over a 10-year period (2010-2019). Records (n = 2039) were divided into four groups: pVBAC, pVBAC + EMCB, labor + ERCB (lab + ERCB), and pERCB. The incidence of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes is reported as counts and percentages. Regression and chi-squared tests were used to compare groups. Significance was determined at a p-value of <0.05. RESULTS: Overall, very low rates (N = 148, 7.3%) of women had a VBAC compared with a repeat CB at this private hospital over the 10-year period. The incidence of adverse outcomes was low regardless of study group. Outcomes differed significantly between groups for postpartum hemorrhage (pERCB seven times less likely than VBAC group) and special care nursery admission (pVBAC + EMCB is 4.6 times more likely than in the VBAC group). CONCLUSION: Overall, it is safe to attempt a VBAC at this private hospital, and labor after a cesarean should be recommended, yet very few women had a VBAC at the study site. The incidence of adverse outcomes was low compared with other published research.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA