Birth after caesarean study--planned vaginal birth or planned elective repeat caesarean for women at term with a single previous caesarean birth: protocol for a patient preference study and randomised trial.
BACKGROUND
For women who have a caesarean section in their preceding pregnancy, two care policies for birth are considered standard: planned vaginal birth and planned elective repeat caesarean. Currently available information about the benefits and harms of both forms of care are derived from retrospective and prospective cohort studies. There have been no randomised trials, and recognising the deficiencies in the literature, there have been calls for methodologically rigorous studies to assess maternal and infant health outcomes associated with both care policies. The aims of our study are to assess in women with a previous caesarean birth, who are eligible in the subsequent pregnancy for a vaginal birth, whether a policy of planned vaginal birth after caesarean compared with a policy of planned repeat caesarean affects the risk of serious complications for the woman and her infant.


METHODS



METHODS
Multicentered patient preference study and a randomised clinical trial.


METHODS
Women with a single prior caesarean presenting in their next pregnancy with a single, live fetus in cephalic presentation, who have reached 37 weeks gestation, and who do not have a contraindication to a planned VBAC. Trial Entry & Randomisation: Eligible women will be given an information sheet during pregnancy, and will be recruited to the study from 37 weeks gestation after an obstetrician has confirmed eligibility for a planned vaginal birth. Written informed consent will be obtained. Women who consent to the patient preference study will be allocated their preference for either planned VBAC or planned, elective repeat caesarean. Women who consent to the randomised trial will be randomly allocated to either the planned vaginal birth after caesarean or planned elective repeat caesarean group. Treatment Groups: Women in the planned vaginal birth group will await spontaneous onset of labour whilst appropriate. Women in the elective repeat caesarean group will have this scheduled for between 38 and 40 weeks. Primary Study Outcome: Serious adverse infant outcome (death or serious morbidity).


METHODS
2314 women in the patient preference study to show a difference in adverse neonatal outcome from 1.6% to 3.6% (p = 0.05, 80% power).
Dodd
Jodie M
JM
Discipline of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia. jodie.dodd@adelaide.edu.au
Crowther
Caroline A
CA
Hiller
Janet E
JE
Haslam
Ross R
RR
Robinson
Jeffrey S
JS
D002585:Cesarean Section; D017558:Elective Surgical Procedures; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D011247:Pregnancy; D012107:Research Design; D016064:Vaginal Birth after Cesarean
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001 Jun;184(7):1365-71; discussion 1371-3
11408854
Birth. 2004 Mar;31(1):49-60
15015993
Med Decis Making. 1995 Jan-Mar;15(1):25-30
7898294
BMJ. 1989 Jul 29;299(6694):313-5
2504416
Med J Aust. 1998 Oct 5;169(7):380-3
9803252
Br J Psychiatry. 1987 Jun;150:782-6
3651732
Med J Aust. 1999 Jun 21;170(12):580-3
10416426
Birth. 2000 Mar;27(1):54-7
10865562
Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2000 Oct;14(4):340-8
11101021
Pediatrics. 1997 Sep;100(3 Pt 1):348-53
9282704
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1999 Aug;66(2):197-204
10468354
BMJ. 2004 Jul 3;329(7456):19-25
15231616
N Engl J Med. 2001 Jul 5;345(1):3-8
11439945
Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ). 2003 Mar;(71):1-8
12696509
Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1998 Jun;41(2):369-81
9646969
BMJ. 1998 Jan 31;316(7128):360
9487173
N Engl J Med. 1992 Jun 11;326(24):1587-92
1584259
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004 Oct 18;(4):CD004224
15495090
Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2005 Sep 22;54(4):1-8
16220739
Am J Med. 1990 Nov;89(5):630-8
1978566
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Feb;176(2):419-25
9065192
Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Mar;103(3):420-9
14990401
Obstet Gynecol. 1991 Mar;77(3):465-70
1825136
N Engl J Med. 1999 Jan 7;340(1):54-7
9878648
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2004 Dec;44(6):521-4
15598289
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2000 Feb;40(1):87-91
10870788
Br J Clin Psychol. 1992 Sep;31(3):301-6
1393159
Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 1999 Jun;26(2):295-304
10399763
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2000 May;40(2):195-9
10925909
N Engl J Med. 2000 Jun 22;342(25):1887-92
10861325
JAMA. 2002 May 22-29;287(20):2684-90
12020304
Lancet. 2000 Oct 21;356(9239):1375-83
11052579
BMJ. 1999 Nov 27;319(7222):1397-400
10574855
Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1995 Feb;102(2):101-6
7756199
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2000 May;40(2):139-55
10925900
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000 Nov;183(5):1187-97
11084565
BMJ. 1993 Sep 18;307(6906):714-7
8401094
Obstet Gynecol. 1997 Aug;90(2):312-5
9241315
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1999 May;39(2):207-14
10755782
Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997 Dec;104(12):1385-90
9422017
Med Care. 1992 Jun;30(6):473-83
1593914
Birth. 2001 Jun;28(2):101-10
11380381
Obstet Gynecol. 1990 Nov;76(5 Pt 1):865-9
2145531
Eur J Cancer. 1999 Oct;35(11):1598-602
10673968
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2004 Oct;44(5):387-91
15387856
Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997 Dec;104(12):1367-73
9422014
N Engl J Med. 2004 Dec 16;351(25):2581-9
15598960
Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2003 Jun 25;51(11):1-20
12848421
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2005 Jun;89(3):319-31
16001462
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996 May;174(5):1569-74
9065131