Commentary

Lessons learned from the history of VBAC


 

References

In December 2014, The Wall Street Journal ran an article about a young mother who wanted a vaginal birth after C-section (VBAC) for her second child. After her hospital stopped offering VBACs, the woman had to find another place to deliver. She did have a successful VBAC, but her story is not unique – many women may not receive adequate consultations about or provider support for VBAC as a delivery option.

According to the article, a lack of clinical support was the reason the hospital discontinued VBACs. Although the hospital’s decision may have frustrated the mother, this ensured that she would not be promised a birthing option that the hospital could not deliver – in all senses of this word. Successful VBAC requires proper patient selection, appropriate consent and adequate provisions in case of emergencies.

Dr. E. Albert Reece

Dr. E. Albert Reece

Not every hospital has made such a choice. Based on studies of a trial of labor after cesarean, conducted after the 1960s, the rate of VBACs increased. As VBACs became more common, the approach to the procedure became more relaxed. VBACs went from only being performed in tertiary care hospitals with appropriate support for emergencies, to community hospitals with no backup. Patient selection became less rigorous, and the rate of complications went up, which, in turn, caused the number of associated legal claims to rise. Hospitals started discouraging VBACs, and ob.gyns. no longer counseled their patients about this option. The VBAC rate decreased, and the C-section rate increased.

Today, many women want to pursue a trial of labor after cesarean. Data from large clinical studies have demonstrated the safety and success of VBAC with proper care. Because of the storied history and a revival of interest in VBACs, we have invited Dr. Mark Landon, the Richard L. Meiling Professor and chairman of the department of obstetrics and gynecology at the Ohio State University, and the lead on one of the recent seminal VBAC studies, to address this topic.

Dr. Reece, who specializes in maternal-fetal medicine, is vice president for medical affairs at the University of Maryland, Baltimore, as well as the John Z. and Akiko K. Bowers Distinguished Professor and dean of the school of medicine. Dr. Reece reported having no relevant financial disclosures. He is the medical editor of this column. Contact him at obnews@frontlinemedcom.com.

Recommended Reading

What does the Human Placenta Project mean for obstetrics care?
MDedge ObGyn
Should the 30-minute rule for emergent cesarean delivery be applied universally?
MDedge ObGyn
Does episiotomy at vacuum delivery increase maternal morbidity?
MDedge ObGyn
In utero exposure to tenofovir associated with lower BMC
MDedge ObGyn
CDC: Hospital support of breastfeeding grows, but improvements needed
MDedge ObGyn
Hospitals improve breastfeeding support
MDedge ObGyn
SSI risk after cesarean is nearly double for Medicaid patients
MDedge ObGyn
More than half of hospitals exceed cesarean delivery benchmark
MDedge ObGyn
Repeat Tdap vaccination is safe in pregnancy
MDedge ObGyn
Barriers to VBAC remain in spite of evidence
MDedge ObGyn

Related Articles

  • Commentary

    Barriers to VBAC remain in spite of evidence

    There continues to be an underutilization of attempted VBAC. We must ask ourselves, are women truly able to choose a trial of labor after cesarean...