Opinions of pregnant women about vaginal birth after caesarean section

Rojjin Mamuk, Ümran Yeşiltepe Oskay

Abstract

Vaginal birth after caesarean section (VBAC) is regarded as an effective option to reduce rapidly increasing C-section rates. The aim of the descriptive and cross-sectional study was to reveal opinions of women with experiences of prior C-section about VBAC and the factors affecting their opinions. The study included 283 pregnant women whit a history of previous C-section and followed up in a research and training hospital in İstanbul. Study data were collected by face-to-face interview method through The Personal Information Form and The Opinions about VBAC Form. Obtained data were analyzed with Number Cruncher Statistical System 2007 and evaluated with percentages, mean, standard deviation and Chi-square test. The statistical significance was set at p<0,05. According to the study results, 74.6% of the participants wanted to have a vaginal birth (VB) in their first pregnancy, whereas 56.9% were satisfied with the result of their first pregnancy with a C-section. The rate of those who are satisfied with the current pregnancy being planned as a repeat C-section is 66.8%. Also of all the women, 66.4% found VBAC acceptable, 44.5% wanted to give birth through VBAC, and 73.1% believed it should be promoted in the country. Women thoughts about VBAC were not affected by sociodemographic and obstetric features (p>0.05). On the other hand dissatisfaction with previous C-section had positive effects on finding VBAC acceptable (p=0.000), willingness to have VBAC (p=0.000), and wanting its promotion in the country (p=0.007). Also dissatisfaction with repeated C-sections plans had positive effects on finding VBAC acceptable (p=0.000) and willingness to have VBAC (p=0.000). Similarly, an increased frequency of antenatal visits was found to increase the thoughts about the promotion of VBAC in the country (p=0.015), and asking to have C-section in the first pregnancy was found to decrease the willingness to have VBAC in the current pregnancy (p=0.000). The study results showed that although the pregnant women participating in this study had positive perceptions about VBAC, they abstained from preferring this method. Also opinions of pregnant women about VBAC were shaped by women’s birth experiences and the care services they received. (Afr J Reprod Health 2022; 26[8]: 100-111).

Full Text:

PDF

References

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Cesarean birth. Washington; 2022. Available from:

https://www.acog.org/womenshealth/faqs/cesareanbirth#:~:text=Cesarean%20birth%20is%20the%20d

elivery,in%20the%20belly%20and%20uterus.

Antoine C and Young BK. Cesarean section one hundred

years 1920–2020: the good, the bad and the ugly. J

Perinat Med. 2021; 49(1): 5–16,

https://doi:10.1515/jpm-2020-0305.

Todman D. A history of caesarean section: From ancient

world to the modern era. ANZJOG. 2007; 47: 357–

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1479-

X.2007.00757.x.

World Health Organization. Caesarean section rates

continue to rise, amid growing inequalities in access.

Geneva; 2018. https://www.who.int/news/item/16-

-2021-caesarean-section-rates-continue-to-riseamid-growing-inequalities-in-access.

Boerma T, Ronsmans C, Melesse DY, Barros AJD, Barros

FC, Juan, L, Moller AB, Say L, Hosseinpoor AR, Yi

M, Neto DLR and Temmerman M. Global

epidemiology of use of and disparities in caesarean

sections. Lancet. 2018; 13: 1341-1348,

https://doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30698-1.

World Health Organization. WHO statement on caesarean

section rates. Geneva; 2015. Available from:

https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/161

/WHO_RHR_15.02_eng.pdf?sequence=1.

Cegolon L, Mastrangelo G, Maso G, Pozzo GD, Ronfani L,

Cegolon A, Heymann WC and Barbone F.

Understanding factors leading to primary cesarean

section and vaginal birth after cesarean delivery in

the Friuli-Venezia Giulia Region (North-Eastern

Italy), 2005–2015. Sci Rep. 2020; 10(1):1-18.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-57037-y.

Montoya-Williams D, Lemas DJ, Spiryda L, Patel K, Neu J

and Carson TL. What are optimal cesarean section

rates in the U.S. and how do we get there? A review

of evidence-based recommendations and

interventions. J Women’s Health. 2017; 26(12):

-1291. https://doi:10.1089/jwh.2016.6188

Liabsuetrakul T, Sukmanee J, Thungthong J and

Lumbiganon P. Trend of cesarean section rates and

correlations with adverse maternal and neonatal

outcomes: A secondary analysis of Thai universal

coverage scheme data. AJP Rep. 2019; 9(4): 328–

, https://doi:10.1055/s-0039-1697656.

Molina G, Weiser TG, Lipsitz SR, Esquivel MM, UribeLeitz T, Azad T, Shah N, Semrau K, Berry WR,

Gawande AA and Haynes AB. Relationship between

cesarean delivery rate and maternal and neonatal

mortality. JAMA. 2015; 314(21), 2263–2270.

https://doi:10.1001/jama.2015.15553.

Sandall J, Tribe RM, Avery L, Mola G, Visser GH, Homer

CS, Gibbons D, Kelly NM, Kennedy HP, Kidanto H,

Taylor P and Temmerman M. Short-term and longterm effects of caesarean section on the health of

women and children. Lancet.2018; 13;392 (10155),

-1357. https://doi:10.1016/S0140-

(18)31930-5.

de Elejalde R and Giolito E. More hospital choices, more

c-sections: Evidence from Chile. IZA Institute of

Labor Economics Discussion Paper Series, No.

2019. Available from:

http://ftp.iza.org/dp12297.pdf.

Visser GHA, Ayres-de-Campos D, Barnea ER, Bernis L,

Di Renzo GC, Lioyd I, Nassar AH, Nicholson W,

Shah PK, Stones W, Sun L, Theron GB and Walani

S. FIGO position paper: how to stop the caesarean

Mamuk and Oskay Opinions of pregnant women about VBAC

African Journal of Reproductive Health August 2022; 26 (8):110

section epidemic. Lancet. 2018; 392(10155): 1286-

https://doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32113-5.

American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 205: Vaginal birth after

cesarean delivery. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2019;

(2): 110-127,

https://doi:10.1097/AOG.0000000000003078.

Carlsson-Fagerberg M and Källén K. Third-trimester

prediction of successful vaginal birth after one

cesarean delivery-A Swedish model. Acta Obstet

Gynecol Scand. 2020; 99(5): 660-8.

https://doi:10.1111/aogs.13783.

Fore MS, Allshouse AA, Carlson NS and Hurt KJ.

Outcomes of trial of labor after cesarean birth by

provider type in low-risk women. Birth. 2020;

(1):123-34. https://doi:10.1111/birt.12474.

The International Federation of Gynecology and

Obstetrics. FIGO ethics and professionalism

guideline: Decision making about vaginal and

caesarean delivery. London; 2020. Available from:

https://www.figo.org/sites/default/files/2020-

/FIGO%20Ethics%20and%20Professionalism%2

Guideline_English.pdf.

World Health Organization. WHO recommendations nonclinical interventions to reduce unnecessary

caesarean sections. Geneva; 2018. Available from:

https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/275

/9789241550338-eng.pdf?ua=1

Lundgren I, Healy P, Caroll M and Begley, C. Clinicians’

views of factors of importance for improving the rate

of VBAC (vaginal birth after caesarean section): A

study from countries with low VBAC rates. BMC

Pregnancy and Childbirth. 2016; 16, 350.

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-016-1144-0.

Nilsson C, Lalor J, Begley C, Carroll M, Gross MM,

Grylka-Baeschlin S, Lundgren I, Matterna A,

Morano S, Nicolletti J and Healy P. Vaginal birth

after caesarean: Views of women from countries with

low VBAC rates. Women Birth. 2017; 30(6): 481-

https://doi:10.1016/j.wombi.2017.04.009.

Lundgren I, Morano S, Nilsson C, Sinclair M and Begley

C. Cultural perspectives on vaginal birth after

previous caesarean section in countries with high and

low rates - A hermeneutic study. Women Birth.

; 33(4):339-347.

https://doi:10.1016/j.wombi.2019.07.300.

Hadjigeorgiou E, Katsie C, Papadopoulou M, Christof MD

and Christoforou A. Women's experiences of VBAC

in Cyprus: a qualitative study. BMC Pregnancy

Childbirth. 2021; 21(1):766.

https://doi:10.1186/s12884-021-04193-7.

Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists. Birth

after previous caesarean birth (Green-top Guideline

No. 45). London; 2015. Available from:

https://www.rcog.org.uk/media/kpkjwd5h/gtg_45.p

df.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and

Devalopment. Health care use - Caesarean sectionsOECD Data. 2018. Available from:

https://data.oecd.org/healthcare/caesareansections.htm.

Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies. 2018

Turkey demographic and health survey. Ankara;

Available from:

https://dhsprogram.com/pubs/pdf/FR372/FR372.pdf

.

Republic of Turkey Ministry of Health. Birth and

Cesarean Section Management Guide. Ankara;

Available from:

https://dosyamerkez.saglik.gov.tr/Eklenti/6407,dogu

m-ve-sezaryen-eylemi-yonetim-rehberipdf.pdf?

Republic of Turkey Ministry of Health. Gynecological

Diseases and Obstetrics Commission Report.

İstanbul; 2017. Available from:

http://www.istanbulsaglik.gov.tr/w/anasayfalinkler/

belge/ekutuphane/kadin_hastaliklari_ve_dogum_bra

nsi_komisyon_calismalari.pdf.

Uçar T, Derya YA, Barut S, Güney E, Sabancı E and Unver

H. Opinions of labor professionals about vaginal

birth after cesarean in Turkey. International Journal

of Caring Sciences. 2018; 11(2): 1043-1049.

Atan ŞÜ, Kavalak O, Dönmez S, Öztürk R, Güleç D, Çelik

N and Weller BK. Opinions and knowledge of

healthcare professionals on vaginal birth after

caesarean section. International Refereed Journal of

Gynaecological Diseases and Maternal Child Health.

; 11: 119-133.

https://doi:10.17367/JACSD.2017.3.4.

Kısa S, Kisa A and Younis MZ. Opinions and attitudes of

obstetricians and midwives in Turkey towards

caesarean section and vaginal birth following a

previous caesarean section. J Int Med Res. 2017;

(6):1739-1749.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0300060516663998.

Gözükara F and Eroğlu K. Factors that affect the choices

of primiparas on the mode of delivery. Journal of

Hacettepe University Faculty of Nursing. 2008;

(1): 32–46.

Şahin H and Tahtabaşı M. Uterine rupture following

vaginal birth after caserean section (VBAC): Clinical

management and ct findings in delayed cases without

antenatal care follow-up. The Journal of Gynecology

- Obstetrics and Neonatology. 2020; 17(4), 519-523.

Canbay FÇ and Çitil ET. Vaginal birth after cesarean or

recurrent elective cesarean section: What are the

decision making processes of pregnant women in

Turkey? A phenomenological study. Health Care For

Women International. 2022;1-20.

https://doi.org/10.1080/07399332.2022.2070624.

Akgün M and Boz İ. Women's decision-making processes

and experiences of vaginal birth after caesarean birth:

A phenomenological study. Int J Nurs Pract. 2019;

(6): 1-8. https://doi:10.1111/ijn.12780.

Güler ES and Yanıkkerem E. The views of women towards

the mode of delivery and vaginal birth after

caesarean. STED. 2018; 27(1): 27-36.

Keedle L, Peters L, Schmied V, Burns E, Keedle W and

Dahlen HC. Women's experiences of planning a

vaginal birth after caesarean in different models of

maternity care in Australia. BMC Pregnancy

Childbirth. 2020; 20(1):381.

https://doi:10.1186/s12884-020-03075-8.

Keedle H, Schmied V, Burns E and Dahlen HG. The

journey from pain to power: A meta-ethnography on

women’s experiences of vaginal birth after

caesarean. Women and Birth: Journal of the

Mamuk and Oskay Opinions of pregnant women about VBAC

African Journal of Reproductive Health August 2022; 26 (8):111

Australian College of Midwives. 2018; 31(1): 69–79.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2017.06.008.

Sys D, Baranowska B, Kajdy A, Tataj-Puzyna U, Gotlib J,

Bączek G, Juszczakiewicz P and Rabijewski M.

Women’s views and preferences regarding the mode

of birth after cesarean section: Polish cross-sectional

web-based survey. European Journal of Obstetrics &

Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2022;

:26-32.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2022.04.006.

Bonzon M, Gross MM, Karch A and Baeschlin SG.

Deciding on the mode of birth after a previous

caesarean section – An online survey investigating

women's preferences in Western Switzerland.

Midwifery. 2017; 50: 219–227.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2017.04.005.

Bergeron V. The ethics of cesarean section on maternal

request: a feminist critique of the American College

of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' position on

patient-choice surgery. Bioethics. 2007; 21(9):478-

https://doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2007.00593.x.

World Health Organization. WHO recommendations

Intrapartum care for a positive childbirth experience.

Geneva; 2018. Available from:

https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/260

/9789241550215-eng.pdf.

Yüksel D, Yüce T, Kalafat E, Aker SŞ and Koç A. The

views of nulliparous pregnant women on delivery.

Turk J Obstet Gynecol. 2016; 13(3):127-131.

https://doi:10.4274/tjod.46144.

Martosa T, Sallay V, Rafael B and Thege BK. Preferred

ways of giving birth in non-pregnant and pregnant

nulliparous women: the role of control beliefs. J

Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2021; 42(3): 201-211.

https://doi:10.1080/0167482X.2019.1710486.

Aktaş D and Gökgöz N. Determining of thought and

satisfactions related to methods of delivery of

women. Journal of Ankara Health Sciences. 2015;

(1): 65-81.

World Association of Perinatal Medicine (WAPM),

together with other national and international

associations of Perinatal Medicine, Obstetrics,

Paediatrics and Neonatology and the collaboration of

Academies, Associations, Foundations, Institutes,

Centres and Humanitarian Organisations all over the

world. Declaration of Barcelona on the Rights of

Mother and Newborn. Barcelona; 2001. Available

from: https://escrh.eu/wpcontent/uploads/2018/02/declarationofbarcelonaont

herightsofmotherandnewborn-1.pdf.

Firoozi M, Tara F, Ahanchian MR and Roudsari RL.

Clinician’s and women's perceptions of individual

barriers to vaginal birth after cesarean in Iran: A

qualitative inquiry. Caspian J Intern Med. 2020;

(3):259-266. https://doi:10.22088/cjim.11.3.259.

Simeone S, Stile F, Assunta G, Gargiula G and Rea T.

Experience of vaginal birth after cesarean: A

phenomenological study. The Journal of Perinatal

Education. 2019; 28(3): 131–141,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1891/1058-1243.28.3.131.

Keedle H, Schmied V, Burns E and Dahlen HC. A narrative

analysis of women's experiences of planning a

vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) in Australia

using critical feminist theory. BMC Pregnancy and

Childbirth. 2019; 19(1): 1-15.

https://doi:10.1186/s12884-019-2297-4.

Attanasio LB, Kozhimannil KB and Kjerullf KH. Women's

preference for vaginal birth after a first delivery by

cesarean. Birth. 2019; 46(1):51-60.

https://doi:10.1111/birt.12386.

Ibrahim BB, Kennedy HP and Whittemore R. Women's

Perceptions of Barriers and Facilitators to Vaginal

Birth After Cesarean in the United States: An

Integrative Review. J Midwifery Womens Health.

; 65(3):349-361.

https://doi:10.1111/jmwh.13083.

Triunfo S, Minciotti C, Burlon B, Giovannangeli F, Danza

M, Tateo S and Lanzone A. Socio-cultural and

clinician determinants in the maternal decisionmaking process in the choice for trial of labor vs.

elective repeated cesarean section: a questionnaire

comparison between Italian settings. J Perinat Med.

; 47(6):656-664. https://doi:10.1515/jpm-2019-

Toohill J, Fenwick J, Gamble J and Creedy DK. Prevalence

of childbirth fear in an Australian sample of pregnant

women. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth. 2014;

:275. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-14-275.

Mortazavi F and Mehrabadi M. Predictors of fear of

childbirth and normal vaginal birth among Iranian

postpartum women: a cross-sectional study. BMC

Pregnancy and Childbirth. 2021; 21:316.

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-021-03790-w.

O’Connell MA, Warren PL, Kenny LC, O’Neill SM and

Khashan AS. The prevalence and risk factors of fear

of childbirth among pregnant women: A crosssectional study in Ireland. Acta Obstet Gynecol

Scand. 2019; 98(8):1014–

https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13599.

Chen S-W, Hutchinson AM, Nagle C and Bucknall TK.

Women’s decision-making processes and the

influences on their mode of birth following a

previous caesarean section in Taiwan: a qualitative

study. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth. 2018; 18:31.

https://doi:10.1186/s12884-018-1661-0.

Lundgren I, van Limbeek E, Vehvilainen-Julkunen K and

Nilsson C. Clinicians’ views of factors of importance

for improving the rate of VBAC (vaginal birth after

caesarean section): A qualitative study from

countries with high VBAC rates. BMC Pregnancy

and Childbirth. 2015; 15, 196.

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-015-0629-6

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.