Cesarean Delivery on Maternal Request

OBJECTIVE

To review systematically the evidence about maternal and infant outcomes of cesarean delivery on maternal request and planned vaginal delivery.

DATA SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Collaboration resources, and Embase and identified 1,406 articles through dual review using a priori inclusion criteria.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

We included English language studies published from 1990 to June 2005 that compared the key reference group (cesarean delivery on maternal request or proxies) and planned vaginal delivery.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

We identified 54 articles for maternal and infant outcomes. Virtually no studies exist on cesarean delivery on maternal request, so the knowledge base rests on indirect evidence from proxies with unique and significant limitations. Most studies compared outcomes by actual routes of delivery, resulting in variable relevance to planned routes of delivery. Primary cesarean delivery on maternal request and planned vaginal delivery likely differ with respect to individual outcomes; for instance, risks of urinary incontinence and maternal hemorrhage were lower with planned cesarean, whereas the risk of neonatal respiratory morbidity was higher and maternal length of stay was longer with planned cesarean delivery. However, our comprehensive assessment, across many outcomes, suggests no major differences between primary cesarean delivery on maternal request and planned vaginal delivery, but the evidence is too weak to conclude definitively that differences are completely absent. If a woman chooses to have a cesarean delivery in her first delivery, she is more likely to have subsequent deliveries by cesarean. With increasing numbers of cesarean delivery, risks occur with increasing frequency.

CONCLUSION

The evidence is significantly limited by its minimal relevance to primary cesarean delivery on maternal request. Future research requires developing consensus about terminology, creating a minimum data set for cesarean delivery on maternal request, improving study design and statistical analyses, attending to major outcomes and their special measurement issues, assessing both short- and long-term outcomes with better measurement strategies, dealing better with confounders, and considering the value or utility of different outcomes.

Cesarean delivery on maternal request

OBJECTIVES

The RTI International-University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Evidence-based Practice Center (RTI-UNC EPC) systematically reviewed the evidence on the trend and incidence of cesarean delivery (CD) in the United States and in other developed countries, maternal and infant outcomes of cesarean delivery on maternal request (CDMR) compared with planned vaginal delivery (PVD), factors affecting the magnitude of the benefits and harms of CDMR, and future research directions.

DATA SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Collaboration resources, and Embase and identified 1,406 articles to examine against a priori inclusion criteria. We included studies published from 1990 to the present, written in English. Studies had to include comparison between the key reference group (CDMR or proxies) and PVD.

REVIEW METHODS

A primary reviewer abstracted detailed data on key variables from included articles; a second senior reviewer confirmed accuracy.

RESULTS

We identified 13 articles for trends and incidence of CD, 54 for maternal and infant outcomes, and 5 on modifiers of CDMR. The incidence of CDMR appears to be increasing. However, accurately assessing either its true incidence or trends over time is difficult because currently CDMR is neither a well-recognized clinical entity nor an accurately reported indication for diagnostic coding or reimbursement. Virtually no studies exist on CDMR, so the knowledge base rests chiefly on indirect evidence from proxies possessing unique and significant limitations. Furthermore, most studies compared outcomes by actual routes of delivery, resulting in great uncertainty as to their relevance to planned routes of delivery. Primary CDMR and planned vaginal delivery likely do differ with respect to individual outcomes for either mothers or infants. However, our comprehensive assessment, across many different outcomes, suggests that no major differences exist between primary CDMR and planned vaginal delivery, but the evidence is too weak to conclude definitively that differences are completely absent. Given the limited data available, we cannot draw definitive conclusions about factors that might influence outcomes of planned CDMR versus PVD.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence is significantly limited by its minimal relevance to primary CDMR. Future research requires developing consensus about terminology for both delivery routes and outcomes; creating a minimum data set of information about CDMR; improving study design and statistical analyses; attending to major outcomes and their special measurement issues; assessing both short- and long-term outcomes with better measurement strategies; dealing better with confounders; and considering the value or utility of different outcomes.

Perinatal depression: a systematic review of prevalence and incidence

OBJECTIVE

We systematically review evidence on the prevalence and incidence of perinatal depression and compare these rates with those of depression in women at non-childbearing times.

DATA SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Sociofile for English-language articles published from 1980 through March 2004, conducted hand searches of bibliographies, and consulted with experts.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

We included cross-sectional, cohort, and case-control studies from developed countries that assessed women for depression during pregnancy or the first year postpartum with a structured clinical interview.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

Of the 109 articles reviewed, 28 met our inclusion criteria. For major and minor depression (major depression alone), the combined point prevalence estimates from meta-analyses ranged from 6.5% to 12.9% (1.0-5.6%) at different trimesters of pregnancy and months in the first postpartum year. The combined period prevalence shows that as many as 19.2% (7.1%) of women have a depressive episode (major depressive episode) during the first 3 months postpartum; most of these episodes have onset following delivery. All estimates have wide 95% confidence intervals, showing significant uncertainty in their true levels. No conclusions could be made regarding the relative incidence of depression among pregnant and postpartum women compared with women at non-childbearing times.

CONCLUSION

To better delineate periods of peak prevalence and incidence for perinatal depression and identify high risk subpopulations, we need studies with larger and more representative samples.