4.2 Article

Childbirth Education Class and Birth Plans Are Associated with a Vaginal Delivery

期刊

BIRTH-ISSUES IN PERINATAL CARE
卷 44, 期 1, 页码 29-34

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/birt.12263

关键词

birth plan; birth preference; childbirth education; choice behavior; mode of delivery

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: To determine whether the mode of delivery was different between women who attended childbirth education (CBE) class, had a birth plan, or both compared with those who did not attend CBE class or have a birth planp Methods: This is a retrospective cross-sectional study of women who delivered singleton gestations > 24weeks at our institution between August 2011 and June 2014. Based on a self-report at the time of admission for labor, women were stratified into four categories: those who attended a CBE class, those with a birth plan, both, and those with neither CBE or birth plan. The primary outcome was the mode of delivery. Multivariate logistic regression analyses adjusting for clinical covariates were performed. Results: In this study, 14,630 deliveries met the inclusion criteria: 31.9 percent of the women attended CBE class, 12.0 percent had a birth plan, and 8.8 percent had both. Women who attended CBE or had a birth plan were older (p < 0.001), more likely to be nulliparous (p < 0.001), had a lower body mass index (p < 0.001), and were less likely to be African-American (p < 0.001). After adjusting for significant covariates, women who participated in either option or both had higher odds of a vaginal delivery (CBE: OR 1.26 [95% CI 1.15-1.39]; birth plan: OR 1.98 [95% CI 1.56-2.51]; and both: OR 1.69 [95% CI 1.46-1.95]) compared with controls. Conclusion: Attending CBE class and/or having a birth plan were associated with a vaginal delivery. These findings suggest that patient education and birth preparation may influence the mode of delivery. CBE and birth plans could be used as quality improvement tools to potentially decrease cesarean rates.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据