Women's experiences of planning a vaginal birth after caesarean in different models of maternity care in Australia.


Journal

BMC pregnancy and childbirth
ISSN: 1471-2393
Titre abrégé: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967799

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
30 Jun 2020
Historique:
received: 15 02 2020
accepted: 23 06 2020
entrez: 2 7 2020
pubmed: 2 7 2020
medline: 9 2 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) is a safe mode of birth for most women but internationally VBAC rates remain low. In Australia women planning a VBAC may experience different models of care including continuity of care (CoC). There are a limited number of studies exploring the impact and influence of CoC on women's experiences of planning a VBAC. Continuity of care (CoC) with a midwife has been found to increase spontaneous vaginal birth and decrease some interventions. Women planning a VBAC prefer and benefit from CoC with a known care provider. This study aimed to explore the influence, and impact, of continuity of care on women's experiences when planning a VBAC in Australia. The Australian VBAC survey was designed and distributed via social media. Outcomes and experiences of women who had planned a VBAC in the past 5 years were compared by model of care. Standard fragmented maternity care was compared to continuity of care with a midwife or doctor. In total, 490 women completed the survey and respondents came from every State and Territory in Australia. Women who had CoC with a midwife were more likely to feel in control of their decision making and feel their health care provider positively supported their decision to have a VBAC. Women who had CoC with a midwife were more likely to have been active in labour, experience water immersion and have an upright birthing position. Women who received fragmented care experienced lower autonomy and lower respect compared to CoC. This study recruited a non-probability based, self-selected, sample of women using social media. Women found having a VBAC less traumatic than their previous caesarean and women planning a VBAC benefited from CoC models, particularly midwifery continuity of care. Women seeking VBAC are often excluded from these models as they are considered to have risk factors. There needs to be a focus on increasing shared belief and confidence in VBAC across professions and an expansion of midwifery led continuity of care models for women seeking a VBAC.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) is a safe mode of birth for most women but internationally VBAC rates remain low. In Australia women planning a VBAC may experience different models of care including continuity of care (CoC). There are a limited number of studies exploring the impact and influence of CoC on women's experiences of planning a VBAC. Continuity of care (CoC) with a midwife has been found to increase spontaneous vaginal birth and decrease some interventions. Women planning a VBAC prefer and benefit from CoC with a known care provider. This study aimed to explore the influence, and impact, of continuity of care on women's experiences when planning a VBAC in Australia.
METHODS METHODS
The Australian VBAC survey was designed and distributed via social media. Outcomes and experiences of women who had planned a VBAC in the past 5 years were compared by model of care. Standard fragmented maternity care was compared to continuity of care with a midwife or doctor.
RESULTS RESULTS
In total, 490 women completed the survey and respondents came from every State and Territory in Australia. Women who had CoC with a midwife were more likely to feel in control of their decision making and feel their health care provider positively supported their decision to have a VBAC. Women who had CoC with a midwife were more likely to have been active in labour, experience water immersion and have an upright birthing position. Women who received fragmented care experienced lower autonomy and lower respect compared to CoC.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
This study recruited a non-probability based, self-selected, sample of women using social media. Women found having a VBAC less traumatic than their previous caesarean and women planning a VBAC benefited from CoC models, particularly midwifery continuity of care. Women seeking VBAC are often excluded from these models as they are considered to have risk factors. There needs to be a focus on increasing shared belief and confidence in VBAC across professions and an expansion of midwifery led continuity of care models for women seeking a VBAC.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32605586
doi: 10.1186/s12884-020-03075-8
pii: 10.1186/s12884-020-03075-8
pmc: PMC7325036
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

381

Références

Lancet. 2018 Oct 13;392(10155):1341-1348
pubmed: 30322584
SSM Popul Health. 2017 Jan 19;3:201-210
pubmed: 29349217
Midwifery. 2015 Oct;31(10):935-40
pubmed: 26092305
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019 Oct 17;19(1):360
pubmed: 31623587
J Midwifery Womens Health. 2020 Jan;65(1):45-55
pubmed: 31448884
Lancet. 2018 Oct 13;392(10155):1358-1368
pubmed: 30322586
Lancet. 2019 Nov 9;394(10210):1750-1763
pubmed: 31604660
Women Birth. 2016 Jun;29(3):214-22
pubmed: 26603016
PLoS One. 2018 Apr 17;13(4):e0194906
pubmed: 29664907
Sci Rep. 2017 Mar 10;7:44093
pubmed: 28281576
J Midwifery Womens Health. 2010 May-Jun;55(3):234-42
pubmed: 20434083
Midwifery. 2014 Oct;30(10):1063-72
pubmed: 24462189
Women Birth. 2017 Dec;30(6):497-505
pubmed: 28522387
Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Oct;126(4):716-23
pubmed: 26348175
PLoS One. 2017 Feb 23;12(2):e0171804
pubmed: 28231285
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015 Sep 03;15:206
pubmed: 26337330
Birth. 2020 Mar;47(1):49-56
pubmed: 31612550
Midwifery. 2015 Jan;31(1):112-21
pubmed: 25132098
PLoS One. 2018 Jul 27;13(7):e0200941
pubmed: 30052666
Birth. 2020 Mar;47(1):57-66
pubmed: 31680337
Women Birth. 2020 May;33(3):273-279
pubmed: 31171497
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015 Feb 05;15:16
pubmed: 25652550
Lancet. 2016 Oct 29;388(10056):2176-2192
pubmed: 27642019
Birth. 2020 Mar;47(1):123-134
pubmed: 31823421
J Midwifery Womens Health. 2014 Nov-Dec;59(6):586-95
pubmed: 25533706
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019 Jul 9;19(1):206
pubmed: 31286892
PLoS Med. 2015 Jun 30;12(6):e1001847; discussion e1001847
pubmed: 26126110
Midwifery. 2018 Jul;62:220-229
pubmed: 29723790
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015 Aug 28;15:196
pubmed: 26314295
Midwifery. 2014 Apr;30(4):420-6
pubmed: 23747292
Patient Educ Couns. 2019 Mar;102(3):586-594
pubmed: 30448044
Reprod Health. 2018 Jul 24;15(1):130
pubmed: 30041661
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Apr;206(4):311.e1-9
pubmed: 22464069
Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2019 Dec;14(1):1605784
pubmed: 31046655
Health Serv Insights. 2017 Apr 21;10:1178632917701123
pubmed: 28469458
Semin Perinatol. 2011 Oct;35(5):257-61
pubmed: 21962624
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019 Apr 29;19(1):142
pubmed: 31035957
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Apr 28;4:CD004667
pubmed: 27121907
Pak J Med Sci. 2016 May-Jun;32(3):711-4
pubmed: 27375719
Women Birth. 2014 Sep;27(3):202-7
pubmed: 24906495
Women Birth. 2020 Jul;33(4):e339-e347
pubmed: 31445846
Midwifery. 2016 Jan;32:21-9
pubmed: 26597110
Midwifery. 2012 Dec;28(6):e874-9
pubmed: 22172743
J Adv Nurs. 2010 Oct;66(10):2142-53
pubmed: 20636467
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2019 Feb;59(1):66-70
pubmed: 29672825
Women Birth. 2018 Feb;31(1):69-79
pubmed: 28655602
J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2006 Nov-Dec;35(6):779-85
pubmed: 17105644
Women Birth. 2019 Nov 30;:
pubmed: 31796343
Qual Health Res. 2012 Jul;22(7):897-910
pubmed: 22427456
Midwifery. 2014 Jan;30(1):e20-5
pubmed: 24225432
CMAJ. 2019 Apr 1;191(13):E352-E360
pubmed: 30936165
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2019 Oct;59(5):684-692
pubmed: 30773608
BJOG. 2014 Jan;121(2):183-92
pubmed: 24251861
Midwifery. 2013 Apr;29(4):407-15
pubmed: 23399319
Women Birth. 2018 Oct;31(5):367-379
pubmed: 29337007
Midwifery. 2015 Aug;31(8):772-8
pubmed: 26001949

Auteurs

Hazel Keedle (H)

School of Nursing and Midwifery, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia. h.keedle@westernsydney.edu.au.

Lilian Peters (L)

School of Nursing and Midwifery, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia.
Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Department of Midwifery Science, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands.

Virginia Schmied (V)

School of Nursing and Midwifery, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia.

Elaine Burns (E)

School of Nursing and Midwifery, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia.

Warren Keedle (W)

School of Environmental Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Bathurst, Australia.

Hannah Grace Dahlen (HG)

School of Nursing and Midwifery, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH