2005Journal of Obstetrics and GynaecologyRequires access

Does discussion of possible scar rupture influence preferred mode of delivery after a caesarean section?

S. Sur, IZ MacKenzie

Open publisher page 12 citations

Abstract

Using retrospective and prospective analyses of antenatal records, it was found that by 2003, discussions about the options for delivery after one lower segment caesarean section (LSCS) were almost always documented in antenatal notes, compared with only rare entries in 1993; specific mention of the risks of scar rupture were made in just under 50% in 2003. There was a considerable reduction in the proportion of women whose preference was to labour in 2003 compared with 1993 and also in the number who ultimately delivered vaginally. There was, however, no evidence that those women with whom possible scar rupture had been discussed were discouraged from attempting vaginal delivery. These data suggest that, contrary to expectations, increasing patients' involvement in their management in this situation does not result in fewer caesarean sections.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Using retrospective and prospective analyses of antenatal records, it was found that by 2003, discussions about the options for delivery after one lower segment caesarean section (LSCS) were almost always documented in antenatal notes, compared with only rare entries in 1993; specific mention of the risks of scar rupture were made in just under 50% in 2003. There was a considerable reduction in the proportion of women whose preference was to labour in 2003 compared with 1993 and also in the number who ultimately delivered vaginally. There was, however, no evidence that those women with whom possible scar rupture had been discussed were discouraged from attempting vaginal delivery. These data suggest that, contrary to expectations, increasing patients' involvement in their management in this situation does not result in fewer caesarean sections.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 12 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Using retrospective and prospective analyses of antenatal records, it was found that by 2003, discussions about the options for delivery after one lower segment caesarean section (LSCS) were almost always documented in antenatal notes, compared with only rare entries in 1993; specific mention of the risks of scar rupture were made in just under 50% in 2003. There was a considerable reduction in the proportion of women whose preference was to labour in 2003 compared with 1993 and also in the number who ultimately delivered vaginally. There was, however, no evidence that those women with whom possible scar rupture had been discussed were discouraged from attempting vaginal delivery. These data suggest that, contrary to expectations, increasing patients' involvement in their management in this situation does not result in fewer caesarean sections.

Key concepts: Medicine, Caesarean section, Vaginal delivery, Lower segment caesarean section, Obstetrics, Caesarean delivery, Uterine rupture, Pregnancy

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Does discussion of possible scar rupture influence preferred mode of delivery after a caesarean section? — Research Paper | ScholarLens