Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32605586›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2020

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

Hazel Keedle, Lilian Peters, Virginia Schmied, Elaine Burns, Warren Keedle, Hannah Grace Dahlen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Risk management of vaginal birth after cesarean section (Review).Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2021
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Hazel KeedleSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia. h.keedle@westernsydney.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1083-7843
Lilian PetersSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia.
Virginia SchmiedSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia.
Elaine BurnsSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia.
Warren KeedleSchool of Environmental Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Bathurst, Australia.
Hannah Grace DahlenSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith, NSW, 2751, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundVaginal 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.

methodsThe 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.

resultsIn 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.

conclusionThis 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.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAustraliaCesarean SectionContinuity of Patient CareDecision MakingFemaleHumansMaternal Health ServicesMidwiferyPregnancySurveys and QuestionnairesVaginal Birth after CesareanYoung AdultActive birthContinuity of careMidwiferyVaginal birth after caesareanVBACWaterbirth

Identifiers

PMID32605586
PMCPMC7325036

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.