You are here: Home / Archives for A Woman's Guide to VBAC

Weighing the Pros and Cons of Planned VBAC and Repeat Cesarean Section

December 12, 2012 By A Woman's Guide to VBAC 3 Comments

 

This article is part of A Woman’s Guide to VBAC: Navigating the NIH Consensus Recommendations, a collection of resources that address the most common and pressing questions women may have about their birth choices. View all sections in the guide, including a link to the authors, on the index page.

 

By Allison Shorten

 

The decision to plan a vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) or a repeat cesarean section (RCS) is a very individual one. There are different risks and benefits for mothers and babies. It is important to weigh
these risks and benefits while taking into account each woman’s unique values, needs, expectations,
past experiences, and desired level of involvement in this decision-making process.

The following summary table compares the various risks and benefits of planned VBAC and planned repeat cesarean section.  This is a list of complications that are often talked about when women are thinking about planned VBAC or planned RCS. In a group of 100,000 women who plan a VBAC, there will be some who experience problems. If those same 100,000 women all planned repeat cesarean surgery, there would also be some who experience problems. There is no certain way to predict what the birth will be like no matter which option is chosen. That is why it is important to think about all of the things that are important to you in making any healthcare decision.

For many of the complications listed, the number of women who experience them during VBAC or RCS is still relatively small in number. It is always important to discuss any questions or concerns about options for birth with a trusted pregnancy care provider who can provide more detailed information and meet your individual decision making needs.

 

 

Information in these tables has been collated from the Final Statement of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Consensus Conference on VBAC held in Washington on March 12, 2010. The other main source of information is the evidence-based report that informed the NIH conference panel (Guise et al 2010). The following list of resources may also be helpful to you if you need further information.

Additional Reading

Filed Under A Woman's Guide to VBAC, Featured Story Tagged With A Woman's Guide to VBAC, VBAC

A Woman’s Guide to VBAC: Weighing the Pros and Cons

September 27, 2011 By A Woman's Guide to VBAC 1 Comment

Weighing the Pros and Cons of Planned Vaginal Birth after Cesarean and Repeat Cesarean Section

This article is part of A Woman’s Guide to VBAC: Navigating the NIH Consensus Recommendations, a collection of resources that address the most common and pressing questions women may have about their birth choices. View all sections in the guide, including a link to the authors, on the index page.

 

By Allison Shorten

The decision to plan a vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) or a repeat cesarean section (RCS) is a very individual one. There are different risks and benefits for mothers and babies. It is important to weigh these risks and benefits while taking into account each woman’s unique values, needs, expectations,
past experiences, and desired level of involvement in this decision-making process.

The following summary table compares the various risks and benefits of planned VBAC and planned repeat cesarean section.  This is a list of complications that are often talked about when women are thinking about planned VBAC or planned RCS. In a group of 100,000 women who plan a VBAC, there will be some who experience problems. If those same 100,000 women all planned repeat cesarean surgery, there would also be some who experience problems. There is no certain way to predict what the birth will be like no matter which option is chosen. That is why it is important to think about all of the things that are important to you in making any healthcare decision.

For many of the complications listed, the number of women who experience them during VBAC or RCS is still relatively small in number. It is always important to discuss any questions or concerns about options for birth with a trusted pregnancy care provider who can provide more detailed information and meet your individual decision making needs.

 

 

Information in these tables has been collated from the Final Statement of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Consensus Conference on VBAC held in Washington on March 12, 2010. The other main source of information is the evidence-based report that informed the NIH conference panel (Guise et al 2010). The following list of resources may also be helpful to you if you need further information.

Additional Reading

Filed Under A Woman's Guide to VBAC, All Recent Articles, Birth, Pregnancy, Preparing for VBAC Tagged With A Woman's Guide to VBAC, VBAC

A Woman’s Guide to VBAC: Discussing Your Options

January 26, 2011 By A Woman's Guide to VBAC Leave a Comment

 

This article is part of A Woman’s Guide to VBAC: Navigating the NIH Consensus Recommendations, a collection of resources that address the most common and pressing questions women may have about their birth choices. View all sections in the guide, including a link to the authors, on theindex page.

By Jill Arnold

 

Talking to your care provider about VBAC can be a sensitive issue. Members of the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists have confirmed that concern over liability is a main reason they do not offer trial of labor to their patients. Some evidence even shows that younger obstetric providers are less willing and interested in allowing their patients to labor.

In addition, care providers, even those who are supportive of VBAC, can feel torn between their unease about what they can and/or want to discuss with their patients and their ethical obligation to deal honestly and openly with patients at all times. Women report feeling strongly influenced by their care providers’ recommendations, even though recommendations are likely to be influenced by the care provider’s fear of being sued (“defensive medicine”), rather than what is in the best interest of the woman or her baby.

In the United States, many women’s choices for care provider and birth setting are limited by finances and/or insurance and Medicaid requirements. Regardless of insurance status, all patients have the right to make informed decisions about their care.

 

Ask Questions

From choosing a care provider to talking about specifics of labor, asking questions is the best way to learn about your care provider and develop a relationship with them (or find someone better). Typical prenatal visits with a doctor are shorter than 10 minutes, so make a list of any questions before your appointment and write down notes on what you will research later. Please do not worry about your questions seeming annoying or time-consuming: you have a right to ask these questions in order to help you make informed decisions about your and your baby’s care. If your care provider shows a pattern of not wanting to answer questions, you have the right to switch to one that listens to your concerns.

If you are seeking midwifery care, especially in an out-of-hospital setting, your prenatal visits are likely to be significantly longer and more focused around your specific concerns and questions. Prenatal visits in a birth center practice are typically at least 30 minutes long and with a home birth midwife are typically one hour long, providing ample time to ask questions about risks and benefits, back-up plans, under what conditions you might be “risked out” of their care, etc. Depending on the midwife’s arrangements for collaboration with and referral to obstetricians, you may or may not have an opportunity to ask questions ahead of time of the doctors who might assume your care in labor.

 

Shop Around

Perhaps you’ve found a care provider who says they attend VBAC, but you recognize a large disparity between what they say and what you read in the NIH VBAC Conference Panel Statement. You can ask them about the gap between evidence and their practice or philosophy to try to clear up any misunderstandings. If their reasons are not satisfactory, it might be a sign to move on. There is no obligation to that care provider to stay in their care. If you feel it would be in your best interest to search for another care provider at any point in your pregnancy, it is up to you to be proactive. If this feels overwhelming, enlist the support of a partner, family member or friend to help make calls, set up appointments and get details squared away with your insurance company.

 

Filed Under A Woman's Guide to VBAC, All Recent Articles, Birth, Choosing a care provider, Pregnancy, Preparing for VBAC

A Woman’s Guide to VBAC: What We Don’t Know

December 17, 2010 By A Woman's Guide to VBAC 1 Comment

 

This article is part of A Woman’s Guide to VBAC: Navigating the NIH Consensus Recommendations, a collection of resources that address the most common and pressing questions women may have about their birth choices. View all sections in the guide, including a link to the authors, on theindex page.

By Amy Romano

 

The NIH Consensus Conference Panel set out to review and publicize the evidence (research) to help women make informed choices between planned VBAC and planned repeat cesarean. Their review revealed that most of the research has focused on short-term outcomes such as bleeding, infection, and length of hospital stay and serious events such as uterine rupture, hysterectomy, and newborn death or serious injury. Much less attention has been given to longer-term outcomes or to the modifiable factors (such as care in pregnancy and labor) that can produce the best health outcomes for mother and baby and make VBAC – or for that matter, repeat cesareans – safer.

The Panel identified ten critical gaps in the evidence, which can be reviewed in full in this section of the Panel’s recommendations: http://consensus.nih.gov/2010/vbacstatement.htm#q6.

This article will take a closer look at several of these gaps, and suggest strategies for making the best choice possible in the absence of good research.

What is the safest way to care for a woman in labor with a scarred uterus? Your likelihood of safely achieving a vaginal birth should you plan a VBAC is affected by some factors that cannot be changed, such as your general health, whether you have had a prior vaginal birth, and the reason for your prior cesarean. But it may also be affected by factors that can be altered by your care providers, your birth setting, your support team, and your choices in labor. Surprisingly, almost no research has been conducted to define the best way to care for women in VBAC labors.

What you can do in the absence of good evidence: Until that research is available, women may need to rely on research about safe practices in any labor, plus some common sense. Try to make choices that keep you and your baby safe and are associated with a higher chance of vaginal birth, such as:

  • Use a midwife for your care, or if none is available, choose a doctor with a low cesarean rate and a high VBAC rate.
  • Avoid induction of labor unless there is a clear need.
  • Plan for excellent labor support, including a doula if possible.
  • Walk, move, and change positions in labor as much as possible.
  • Plan to use a variety of strategies to cope with pain before considering an epidural, including a tub or shower, position changes, relaxation techniques, and massage or counter-pressure.
  • Stay well nourished and hydrated.
  • Follow your own urge to push and stay off your back when pushing.

Women without a prior cesarean can also reduce their chance of a c-section by staying home in early labor and having intermittent (periodic) monitoring of the baby’s heartbeat in labor. These recommendations are more controversial for women with prior c-sections. Many care providers, concerned about the small possibility of uterine rupture and their professional liability should it occur, will insist that a woman with a scarred uterus come to the hospital as soon as regular contractions begin and that the fetal heart rate be continuously monitored after hospital admission. There is no evidence that coming to the hospital early in labor is safer than encouraging the woman to experience early labor in their own home, and it is very likely to increase the chance of a cesarean by setting into motion the cascade of interventions and putting you “on the clock.” If you do stay home in early labor, have someone there to give you continuous physical and emotional support and call your care provider if you have any symptoms that concern you.

Continuous electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) increases the chance that a low-risk woman will have a c-section, but no research tells us if the same is true in VBAC labors, nor under which circumstances, if any, continuous EFM improves health outcomes for the baby in VBAC labors. An abnormally slow fetal heart rate is the best indicator that the woman’s uterine scar has ruptured or is about to rupture, and continuous monitoring can detect a slow heart rate quickly. But early diagnosis of a problematic fetal heart rate pattern may not always alter the outcome – some babies may still be injured no matter how early the diagnosis and other babies may be OK even if the diagnosis is delayed. In the absence of conclusive evidence, most care providers will recommend or insist on continuous EFM and many women may feel safer with continuous monitoring. If you have continuous fetal monitoring, ask for cordless (or “telemetry”) monitoring that allows you to move around. Most hospitals have water-proof fetal monitoring equipment so you may be able to use a shower or tub for pain relief even with continuous monitoring.

What are the long-term outcomes for mothers and babies after VBAC, unplanned repeat cesarean, and planned repeat cesarean? Not enough research is available to provide a full picture of the long-term benefits and harms of different birth routes.

By far, most of the evidence from long-term studies or observations favors planned VBAC. Women who plan and achieve a VBAC have the best long-term health, in part because they avoid the known increased risks of placenta accreta, placenta previa, and hysterectomy should they become pregnant again. (These risks are reviewed in this section of the guide.) We have less evidence for other long-term outcomes, but the evidence we do have suggests that planned VBAC may also reduce the likelihood of:

  • chronic pain
  • subsequent ectopic pregnancy
  • stillbirth in a subsequent pregnancy
  • infertility
  • complications during subsequent abdominal or pelvic surgeries, including surgical adhesions (which may make the surgery and the recovery more difficult), significant bleeding, and injuries to the bladder, ureters, and bowel.

On the other hand, although the overall likelihood of injury to the baby is low whether a woman plans a VBAC or a repeat cesarean, more babies experience brain or nerve injuries during VBAC labors than during planned repeat cesareans, and some of these injuries have long-term consequences. The researchers found no studies that measured the impact of planned VBAC versus planned repeat cesarean on the long-term neurologic development of infants.

The researchers tried to determine if planned repeat cesarean protected pelvic floor strength and function. They found no studies that looked at this issue, and state that the body of literature that suggests that primary (first birth) elective cesarean delivery offers a modest, short-term benefit to the pelvic floor may not apply to women considering repeat cesarean delivery. This is because, unlike a woman considering a cesarean for her first birth, women considering repeat cesareans have had prior pregnancies and may have had prior labors, both of which alter the pelvic floor muscles.

What you can do in the absence of good evidence: It is reasonable to incorporate these findings into your decision-making even though they come from studies that are not as strong as they could be. It is clear that for women who may go on to have more children, a history of multiple cesareans increases risks substantially in subsequent pregnancies. Therefore, you should strongly consider a VBAC if you think there is a chance you might become pregnant again in the future. Even if you do not plan to have more children, you should be aware of risks for future pregnancies. Many women change their mind about becoming pregnant again or decide to carry an unplanned pregnancy.

What approach to decision-making, what care around the time of birth, and which planned mode of birth protect and promote the psychological and emotional wellbeing of mothers, infants, and families? The researchers found no studies that address psychological or emotional outcomes.

What you can do in the absence of good evidence: Even though there is no research specific to women with prior cesareans, research generally suggests that you are the least likely to suffer emotionally or psychologically when you:

  • participate actively in your care
  • have care providers who are responsive to your needs and desires
  • have good emotional support around the time of birth and in the days and weeks after the baby is born.

On the other hand, unexpected serious outcomes, such as death or injury to the baby or a hemorrhage requiring hysterectomy, can cause emotional suffering that can sometimes be debilitating and long-term. Serious outcomes are least likely in women who successfully birth vaginally, so strategies that safely increase the likelihood of vaginal birth in women planning a VBAC may protect emotional and psychological wellbeing as well.

If you experience emotional distress after birth, reach out to support groups in your community or online. Solace for Mothers, the International Cesarean Awareness Network, and Postpartum Progress are great resources.

What is the effect on breastfeeding of VBAC, unplanned repeat cesarean, and planned repeat cesarean? The researchers found no studies that address breastfeeding rates or the likelihood and severity of breastfeeding problems.

What you can do in the absence of good evidence: Be aware that it is very likely that VBAC will increase the ease with which you will be able to breastfeed, since vaginal birth and breastfeeding are part of a biological continuum. In addition, in most settings, cesarean surgery necessitates at least a brief (and sometimes prolonged) separation between mother and baby, which is known to disrupt breastfeeding, and postoperative pain may make early breastfeeding difficult.

Also be aware that with excellent lactation support and patience, breastfeeding difficulties related to cesarean surgery can usually be overcome. Whether you plan a vaginal birth or a repeat cesarean, discuss with your care providers your desire to minimize separation from your baby, including strategies for keeping your baby with you or your partner should you have a cesarean. If possible, give birth in a setting that adheres to the standards of the Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative.

Filed Under A Woman's Guide to VBAC, All Recent Articles

The “Immediately Available” Standard for VBAC

November 24, 2010 By A Woman's Guide to VBAC Leave a Comment

 

This article is part of A Woman’s Guide to VBAC: Navigating the NIH Consensus Recommendations, a collection of resources that address the most common and pressing questions women may have about their birth choices. View all sections in the guide, including a link to the authors, on theindex page.

 

By Hilary Gerber and Amy Romano

 

Vaginal births after prior cesareans (VBAC s) were not always as uncommon as they are now. The frequency of attempted VBACs in the United States in recent decades has been associated with reactions to statements published by two major medical organizations:  the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The most significant impact on VBAC access came with ACOG’s so-called “immediately available” standard.

 

What Is the “Immediately Available” Standard and What Was its Immediate Effect?

In 1999, three years after a widely publicized but also widely criticized study was published (MacMahon et al., 1996), ACOG changed their practice bulletin on VBAC to include the recommendation that “ VBAC should be attempted in institutions equipped to respond to emergencies with physicians immediately available to provide emergency care.” (ACOG, 1999) This practice bulletin also recommended that a physician “capable of monitoring labor and performing an emergency cesarean delivery” be “immediately available throughout active labor,” and that anesthesia and personnel for an emergency cesarean be “available.” The “[i]nability to perform emergency cesarean delivery because of unavailable surgeon, anesthesia, sufficient staff or facility” was considered to be a contraindication for VBAC.

These recommendations were given a Level C rating, which means they were based on consensus and expert opinion, not research. The recommendation that “most women” who were good candidates for VBACs “should be counseled about VBAC and offered a trial of labor,” on the other hand, was a Level A recommendation, which means it is “based on good and consistent scientific evidence.”

Unfortunately, the lower rated recommendation for immediately available emergency surgery was interpreted by many institutions to mean 24 hour in-house obstetrics and anesthesia must be present to allow a trial of labor after cesarean, and has prevented the higher rated recommendation to offer VBAC to eligible patients from being actualized.(Guise J-M et al., 2010) This has led to serious barriers to planned VBAC for women who are good candidates and desire a chance at vaginal birth.

This “immediately available” standard was not explained in any more detail in ACOG’s practice bulletin on vaginal delivery after cesarean, but it was expanded on in a later ACOG committee opinion on anesthesia and obstetrics as “a local decision based on each institution’s available resources and geographic location.” (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and American Society of Anesthesiologists, 2009) Even though this explanation clearly allows for a very flexible definition of “immediately available” that takes into account individual hospital characteristics, the reaction of many smaller, more geographically remote hospitals was to ban VBACs if they could not provide in-house anesthesia and continuous supervision by an ob/gyn. One study of hospitals in a large geographic region noted that more than 30% of institutions that previously offered VBAC before the change in the guidelines were no longer allowing them.(Roberts et al., 2007) In a 2006 survey of women who gave birth in U.S. hospitals, 57% of mothers who had a prior cesarean and wanted to try for a VBAC were refused the chance, and 68% reported it was due to the unwillingness of their provider or hospital, and only 20% said there was a medical reason given. (Declercq et al., 2006)

 

What Did the NIH Consensus Panel Recommend Regarding the Immediately Available Standard?

When the NIH Consensus Panel looked at the “immediately available” standard, the evidence was mixed when discussing the relationship between “decision to incision”, or time between signs that a cesarean section may be necessary (in the case of uterine rupture, that would usually be fetal heart rate decelerations) and performing the cesarean section. Two large studies that examine how that response time may influence poor fetal outcomes were included in this evidence report. All of the research was done in hospitals with in-house anesthesia and obstetrics, and there were still occasional fetal deaths, and no consistent evidence that a quicker response or in house anesthesia made could prevent the extremely rare fetal death. The NIH Consensus Panel concluded that the evidence on response time was “insufficient”, but they did suggest that fetal bradycardia, or slow heart rate, should indicate a “prompt delivery”. No studies compared in-house obstetrics and anesthesia to on call obstetrics and anesthesia.

In addition, Anne Lyerly, a prominent obstetrician and bioethicist who has written as a member of the Obstetrics and Gynecology Risk Group in ACOG’s journal Obstetrics and Gynecology, testified at the 2010 NIH VBAC Consensus Development Conference. She argued that the absolute risk for fetal death for both VBAC attempts and a first time (also known as primary) vaginal delivery are practically identical. (See Putting Uterine Rupture into Perspective in this Guide). She warns that distorting risk and limiting informed choice in this manner “can lead to care that is neither evidence-based nor patient-centered, often to the detriment of both women and infants.” (Lyerly et al., 2007)

 

ACOG’s Response and New Guidelines

In the wake of the NIH Consensus Conference, the Editor-in-Chief of Obstetrics & Gynecology, ACOG’s peer-reviewed journal, devoted his editorial to calling for reconsideration of the immediate availability standard. Consumer advocates also waged a campaign to convince ACOG to revisit the standard. And indeed, in July 2010, ACOG released an updated version of their practice bulletin on VBAC (American Congress of Obstetrics and Gynecologists, 2010).  Although the bulletin still recommends that VBACs occur in facilities capable of providing immediately available emergency care, the following caveats were added to this recommendation: 

When resources for immediate cesarean delivery are not available, the College recommends that health care providers and patients considering [trial of labor after cesarean] discuss the hospital’s resources and availability of obstetric, pediatric, anesthetic, and operating room staffs. Respect for patient autonomy supports that patients should be allowed to accept increased levels of risk, however, patients should be clearly informed of such potential increase in risk and management alternatives.

Although it is still too early to tell whether or not these new guidelines have made any significant changes in VBAC availability throughout the United States, the changes themselves are significant in their own right.  To clarify, women can now challenge hospitals and/or care providers who have instituted VBAC bans by referring to ACOG’s own claims about respect for patient autonomy and responsibility. For it is a woman’s responsibility to be apprised of the potential increase in risk, but it is also her right to take on such risks as she sees fit.

Despite these very important changes, women will still face hospitals and providers that refuse to “offer” VBAC because of inability to intervene “immediately” should an urgent complication develop in a VBAC labor. Other sections of this guide offer suggestions for putting the risks of VBAC into perspective and taking action at the community level to improve access to VBAC.

 

Additional Reading

 

References

1. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and American Society of Anesthesiologists (2009). ACOG committee opinion No. 433: optimal goals for anesthesia care in obstetrics. Obstet.Gynecol., 113, 1197-1199.

2. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (1999). Practice Bulletin #5. “Vaginal Birth after Previous Cesarean Section”

3. American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (2010).  Practice Bulletin #115.  “Vaginal Birth after Previous Cesarean Delivery.”

4. Declercq, E., Sakala, C., Corry, M. P., & Applebaum, S. (2006). Listening to Mothers II: Report of the Second National Survey of Women’s Childbearing Experiences New York: Childbirth Connection.

5. Guise J-M, Eden K, Emeis C, Denman MA, Marshall N, Fu R et al. (2010). Vaginal Birth After Cesarean: New Insights (Rep. No. 191). Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

6. Lyerly, A. D., Mitchell, L. M., Armstrong, E. M., Harris, L. H., Kukla, R., Kuppermann, M. et al. (2007). Risks, values, and decision making surrounding pregnancy. Obstet.Gynecol., 109, 979-984.

7. McMahon, M. J., Luther, E. R., Bowes, W. A., Jr., & Olshan, A. F. (1996). Comparison of a trial of labor with an elective second cesarean section. N.Engl.J.Med., 335, 689-695.

8. Roberts, R. G., Deutchman, M., King, V. J., Fryer, G. E., & Miyoshi, T. J. (2007). Changing policies on vaginal birth after cesarean: impact on access. Birth, 34, 316-322.

Filed Under A Woman's Guide to VBAC, All Recent Articles, Birth, Preparing for VBAC

VBAC Success Rates and Prediction Models: Understanding Your Chances of Important Outcomes

September 27, 2010 By A Woman's Guide to VBAC Leave a Comment

  

This article is part of A Woman’s Guide to VBAC: Navigating the NIH Consensus Recommendations, a collection of resources that address the most common and pressing questions women may have about their birth choices. View all sections in the guide, including a link to the authors, on the index page.

 

By Pam Candelaria

 

If you are choosing VBAC, you probably have questions about how your delivery will go. You may wonder how many VBACs are successful or, perhaps more importantly, if your own planned VBAC will end in a vaginal birth. You may be concerned about whether having a lower chance of VBAC success means you have a higher chance of uterine rupture. You may be worried that you’re not an ideal VBAC candidate and wonder if planning a VBAC is still a good idea.  

The great news is that most VBACs are successful! While many factors may influence your personal chances of success, overall rates of VBAC success average 74%, and even in women who are not considered good candidates, the chance of having a vaginal birth is almost always above 50%. It is critical to remember that no single factor can tell you whether your own labor will end with a vaginal birth. Some things, like having a previous vaginal birth, either before or after your previous c-section, are very strongly associated with VBAC success; others, like your height, may not have as much impact; and still others, like the size of your baby, can simply not be known until after delivery. Because your birth can be influenced by so many things, and because those things don’t equally affect your chances of success, it is impossible to say before labor begins whether any individual woman will deliver vaginally.

In spite of this inherent uncertainty, there are many ways we can try to estimate an individual woman’s chance of VBAC success. The Vaginal Birth After Cesarean calculator developed by Grobman, et al, uses factors that are easily identified at the beginning of pregnancy and offers a statistical glimpse of potential VBAC success. One limitation of calculators like this one is their inability to account for the unique situations of individual women. For example, a previous diagnosis of cephalo-pelvic disproportion (or CPD) could be caused by a baby that is truly too big to fit through a mother’s pelvis, but it is also frequently associated with posterior (“sunny side up”) positioning, a circumstance that, unlike absolute CPD, need not reoccur (or even preclude a vaginal birth) in a future VBAC attempt. Some maternal illnesses like gestational diabetes can be controlled for some women, potentially reducing any negative impact on a planned VBAC.

You should always discuss what factors may affect your planned VBAC in detail with your provider. A careful review of your unique history is the best way to determine your personal chance of a successful TOL.

Even if you have factors associated with lower rates of VBAC success, remember that an unsuccessful TOL does not mean you will experience uterine rupture! With a single previous low-transverse c-section, the risk of uterine rupture is less than 1% even if you are not an “ideal” VBAC candidate. And remember: if VBAC is important to you, a lower chance of success is still better than no chance of success. Prediction calculators, conversations with care providers, and doing your own research are all valuable, but fallible. The only true way to know if you can VBAC is to give your body, and your baby, a chance to try.

Filed Under A Woman's Guide to VBAC, All Recent Articles, Birth, Preparing for VBAC Tagged With A Woman's Guide to VBAC, VBAC

A Woman’s Guide to VBAC: Navigating the NIH Consensus Recommendations

September 7, 2010 By A Woman's Guide to VBAC 2 Comments

 

In June 2010, a National Institutes of Health (NIH) panel published a Consensus Development Conference Statement on vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC).

In addition to examining the current evidence related to VBAC and offering recommendations for future research on this topic, the NIH panel concluded that VBAC was a “reasonable option” for most women with a previous cesarean section.

In the context of a current birth climate that can be somewhat hostile toward VBAC, this was an exciting moment for many birth advocates, maternity care providers, and mothers!

But even with all that is included in the NIH Statement on VBAC, it might be difficult for many of us to wade through the information in it and figure out what it means for us and our particular birth options and unique circumstances.

This is where the Guide comes into play.

A group of maternity care experts and VBAC advocates came together to create A Woman’s Guide to VBAC: Navigating the NIH Consensus Recommendations, a free online resource guide that addresses the most common and pressing questions women may have about their birth choices in what could be called the “post-NIH-Consensus-Recommendations Era.” We hope the Guide gives you the tools you need to empower yourself to advocate for you, your baby, and your birth choices!

 

Sections in A Woman’s Guide to VBAC:

 

The Inspiration for this Project

The concept for this guide was borne out of many things: the timeliness of the NIH panel’s statement on VBAC, the importance of the statement itself, and our personal interest in advocating for women seeking vaginal birth after cesarean.

But we would be remiss if we didn’t acknowledge another source of my inspiration for this project: namely, the heartfelt and heartening consumer participation in the NIH Consensus Development Conference on Vaginal Birth After Cesarean.

As women who were lucky enough to attend the NIH Consensus Conference on VBAC in person (Kristen) or view the entire proceedings in real time by webcast (Amy), we can say with some certainty that consumers – that is, the mothers, doulas, midwives, nurses, doctors, and other birth advocates who traveled from near and far and volunteered their time to attend—played a big role in this conference!

We listened, we read, we talked with one another, we got the word out to women who couldn’t participate in the meeting, and we asked some of the most incisive questions of the entire conference proceedings.

Quite simply, we made a difference.

This guide is dedicated to those consumers—and to all of us who are maternity care consumers, whether we are currently pregnant, have been pregnant, or simply work and advocate on behalf of pregnant women.
.
.

What exactly is a National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Statement?

This statement is the product of an NIH Consensus Development Conference. These two-and-a-half day conferences—which are free and open to the public—are organized by the NIH to address issues in medicine that are both controversial and pertinent to health care providers and the general public.

During the NIH Consensus Development Conference on VBAC, an independent panel listened to presentations given by invited expert speakers. The panel also heard input from members of the general public during Q&A sessions. Finally, drawing upon the conference proceedings and upon a systematic review of the evidence on VBAC, the panel drafted their statement on VBAC.

Like all Consensus Development Statements, the statement on VBAC is not legally binding. It does not create practice guidelines, nor does it establish any health policies. Nonetheless, it is still an exceedingly important document. In fact, because of the high-quality evidence that the NIH panel uses to create consensus development statements, the NIH claims that it is “reasonable to expect that the panel will be able to give clinical guidance” to care providers.

Filed Under A Woman's Guide to VBAC, All Recent Articles, Birth, Birth plans, Choosing a care provider, Pregnancy, Preparing for VBAC Tagged With A Woman's Guide to VBAC