» Articles » PMID: 15965624

The UTAH VBAC Study

Overview
Specialty Health Services
Date 2005 Jun 21
PMID 15965624
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: In July 1999, The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) issued Practice Guideline number 5 on vaginal birth after cesarean section (VBAC) and trial of labor (TOL). This updated guideline recommends that a physician be immediately available during a TOL in the rare case of complications. We examined the effect this new guideline would have on physician's VBAC/TOL practices in Utah.

Objective: 1) Explore physician knowledge of ACOG Practice Guideline number 5; 2) Evaluate change in physician's VBAC practices in the previous 12 months; 3) Evaluate physician's ability to comply with ACOG Practice Guideline number 5 recommendations by rural, suburban, and urban location.

Methods: In spring 2001, we surveyed by mail all physicians practicing obstetrics in Utah. Questions included demographics, hospital data, VBAC/TOL practice patterns and awareness of ACOG Practice Guideline number 5. Physicians were classified as urban, suburban, or rural by their primary delivery hospital.

Results: We found 97% of obstetricians and 79% of family physicians were aware of ACOG Practice Guideline number 5. Forty-five percent of all physicians reported a decline in VBAC practices in the preceding 12 months. Urban physicians' use of VBAC/TOL decreased the least, followed by rural and suburban. Eighty-seven percent of physicians had C/S "immediately" available during TOL: urban physicians 100%, suburban 88%, and rural physicians 76%. Emergency C/S delivery was performed fastest at urban hospitals, slower at suburban, and slowest at rural hospitals.

Conclusion: Physicians use of VBAC/TOL has changed. TOL is offered less by obstetrical providers in Utah and more repeat C/S are performed since 1999 when ACOG updated this policy guideline. This decline has been more noticeable in suburban and rural hospitals and is consistent with recent national trends. Many rural physicians are unable to comply with ACOG Practice Guideline number 5 recommendations.

Citing Articles

Economic Evaluations Comparing a Trial of Labor with an Elective Repeat Cesarean Delivery: A Systematic Review.

Rogers A, Rogers N, Kilgore M, Subramaniam A, Harper L Value Health. 2017; 20(1):163-173.

PMID: 28212958 PMC: 5319694. DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.08.738.


Physician characteristics and the reported effect of evidence-based practice guidelines.

Sammer C, Lykens K, Singh K Health Serv Res. 2008; 43(2):569-81.

PMID: 18484106 PMC: 2442364. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2007.00788.x.

References
1.
McMahon M, Luther E, BOWES Jr W, Olshan A . Comparison of a trial of labor with an elective second cesarean section. N Engl J Med. 1996; 335(10):689-95. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199609053351001. View

2.
Greene M . Vaginal delivery after cesarean section--is the risk acceptable?. N Engl J Med. 2001; 345(1):54-5. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM200107053450108. View

3.
. Improving the timeliness of emergency C-sections at Southwestern Vermont Medical Center leads to improved patient care and increased physician satisfaction. Qual Lett Healthc Lead. 1993; 5(1):6-8. View

4.
Leung A, Leung E, Paul R . Uterine rupture after previous cesarean delivery: maternal and fetal consequences. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993; 169(4):945-50. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9378(93)90032-e. View

5.
Jones R, Nagashima A, Goodlin R . Rupture of low transverse cesarean scars during trial of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 1991; 77(6):815-7. View