首页> 外文期刊>BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth >Clinical interventions that influence vaginal birth after cesarean delivery rates: Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis
【24h】

Clinical interventions that influence vaginal birth after cesarean delivery rates: Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis

机译:影响阴道分娩后的临床干预措施后剖宫产率:系统评价和荟萃分析

获取原文
           

摘要

BACKGROUND:To systematically review the literature on clinical interventions that influence vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) rates.METHODS:We searched Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Wiley Cochrane Library, CINAHL via EBSCOhost; and Ovid PsycINFO. Additional studies were identified by searching for clinical trial records, conference proceedings and dissertations. Limits were applied for language (English and French) and year of publication (1985 to present). Two reviewers independently screened comparative studies (randomized or non-randomized controlled trials, and observational designs) according to a priori eligibility criteria: women with prior cesarean sections; any clinical intervention or exposure intended to increase the VBAC rate; any comparator; and, outcomes reporting VBAC, uterine rupture and uterine dehiscence rates. One reviewer extracted data and a second reviewer verified for accuracy. Meta-analysis was conducted using Mantel-Haenszel (random effects model) relative risks (VBAC rate) and risk differences (uterine rupture and dehiscence). Two reviewers independently conducted methodological quality assessments using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT).RESULTS:Twenty-nine studies (six trials and 23 cohorts) examined different clinical interventions affecting rates of vaginal deliveries among women with a prior cesarean delivery (CD). Methodological quality was good overall for the trials; however, concerns among the cohort studies regarding selection bias, comparability of groups and outcome measurement resulted in higher risk of bias. Interventions for labor induction, with or without cervical ripening, included pharmacologic (oxytocin, prostaglandins, misoprostol, mifepristone, epidural analgesia), non-pharmacologic (membrane sweep, amniotomy, balloon devices), and combined (pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic). Single studies with small sample sizes and event rates contributed to most comparisons, with no clear differences between groups on rates of VBAC, uterine rupture and uterine dehiscence.CONCLUSIONS:This systematic review evaluated clinical interventions directed at increasing the rate of vaginal delivery among women with a prior CD and found low to very low certainty in the body of evidence for cervical ripening and/or labor induction techniques. There is insufficient high-quality evidence to inform optimal clinical interventions among women attempting a trial of labor after a prior CD.
机译:背景:系统地审查对剖宫产后阴道分娩的临床干预措施的文献中的临床干预率。方法:我们搜索了Ovid Medline,Ovid Embase,Wiley Cochrane图书馆,Cinahl通过EBSCOHOST。和ovid psycinfo。通过寻找临床试验记录,会议诉讼和论文来确定额外的研究。限制用于语言(英语和法语)和出版年份(1985年至今)。两位审阅人员根据先前的剖宫产的优惠标准独立筛选比较研究(随机或非随机对照试验和观察设计);任何临床干预或旨在增加VBAC率的曝光率;任何比较者;并且,报告VBAC,子宫破裂和子宫裂开率的结果。一个审阅者提取数据和第二次审阅者进行准确性。使用Mantel-Haenszel(随机效果模型)相对风险(VBAC率)和风险差异(子宫破裂和裂开)进行META分析。两位审稿人使用混合方法评估工具(MMAT)独立开展方法论质量评估。结果:29项研究(六项试验和23个队列)检查了影响患有先前剖宫产(CD)的阴道递送率的不同临床干预措施。方法论质量良好的审判良好;然而,关于选择偏差的队列研究,组和结果测量的可比性研究的担忧导致偏倚的风险较高。劳动诱导的干预,有或没有宫颈成熟,包括药理(催产素,前列腺素,误解酚,米非司酮,硬膜外镇痛),非药物学(膜扫描,羊膜,气球装置)和组合(药理学和非药物)。具有小的样本尺寸和事件率的单一研究导致大多数比较,在VBAC,子宫破裂和子宫裂开的速率下没有明确差异,子宫破裂和子宫裂开。结论:这种系统审查评估了针对妇女阴道分娩速度的临床干预措施先前的CD,在宫颈成熟和/或劳动诱导技术的证据中发现低到非常低的确定性。没有足够的高质量证据,以便在先前的CD后试图劳动试验的妇女的最佳临床干预措施。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号