IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/19938381104-1108_8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Factors influencing the practice of vaginal birth after cesarean section

Author

Listed:
  • Goldman, G.
  • Pineault, R.
  • Potvin, L.
  • Blais, R.
  • Bilodeau, H.

Abstract

Objectives. Vaginal birth after cesarean has been recommended for most women with previous cesarean sections for the past 10 years. This practice, however, has not yet been generalized because high variations can still be observed among countries, hospitals, and physicians. Methods. A case-control study involving 635 case patients and 2593 control patients was carried out to determine which characteristics of the physician, the patient, or the hospital were important in the adoption of this practice. Results. The results of the multiple stepwise logistic regression analysis indicate a higher likelihood that women will experience vaginal birth after cesarean if their physicians had cesarean rates under 20%, had less than 5% of their patients considered at risk, and were younger than 54 years old. Vaginal birth after cesarean was also favored by hospitals characterized by a high degree of neonatal and obstetrical specialization, and a patient population with a low level of education. Conclusions. This policy is still in the developmental stage, as evidenced by the great variability between hospitals and physicians in rates of vaginal birth after cesarean. Further efforts are required for this policy to become the norm.

Suggested Citation

  • Goldman, G. & Pineault, R. & Potvin, L. & Blais, R. & Bilodeau, H., 1993. "Factors influencing the practice of vaginal birth after cesarean section," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 83(8), pages 1104-1108.
  • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1993:83:8:1104-1108_8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1993:83:8:1104-1108_8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.