Prepared by:
Oregon Health & Science University Evidence-based Practice Center Portland, Oregon
Jeanne-Marie Guise, M.D., M.P.H.
Principal Investigator
Marian S. McDonagh, Pharm.D.
Jason Hashima
Dale F. Kraemer, Ph.D.
Karen B. Eden, Ph.D.
Michelle Berlin, M.D., M.P.H.
Peggy Nygren, M.A.
Patricia Osterweil
Kathryn Pyle Krages, A.M.L.S., M.A.
Mark Helfand, M.D., M.S.
File Name Description Software Version File Size ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 01front1.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 39KB 4 pages Contents: Title Page, Preface, Acknowledgments ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 02abstr.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 24KB 2 pages Contents: Structured Abstract ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 03v1cont.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 35KB 3 pages Contents: Table of Contents ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 04summ.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 121KB 11 pages Contents: Summary: Purpose of Report and Target Audience, Overview, Reporting the Evidence, Methodology, Findings, Summary of Evidence, Future Research ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 05chap1.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 46KB 5 pages Contents: Chapter 1. Introduction: Purpose of Report and Target Audience, Evidence-based Approach, Background and Significance, Burden of Condition, Table 1. Total primary cesarean rates and VBAC rates: United States, 1989-2000 ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 06chap2.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 68KB 8 pages Contents: Chapter 2. Methodology: Technical Advisory Panel, Analytic Framework and Key Questions, Literature Search and Selection of Articles, Included Studies-Evidence Table Level, Data Extraction, Assessment of Study Quality, Data Synthesis, Figure 1. Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Analytic Framework, Figure 2. Search and Selection of Citations by Topic ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 07chap3.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 545KB 43 pages Contents: Chapter 3. Results: Outcome Comparisons: Question 1. Likelihood of Vaginal Delivery, Question 2. Predictive Tools, Question 3. Maternal and Infant Outcomes, Question 4. Uterine Rupture, Question 5. Health Status, Question 6. Patient Satisfaction, Question 7. Cost & Healthcare Resources Decision Factors: Question 8. Individual Factors, Question 9. Patient Preferences, Question 10. Provider Characteristics Figure 3. Vaginal Delivery: Oxytocin vs Spontaneous Onset of Labor Figure 4. Vaginal Delivery: Oxytocin (Induction or Augmentation) vs No Oxytocin Figure 5. Vaginal Delivery: Prostaglandins vs Spontaneous Onset of Labor Figure 6. Asymptomatic Uterine Rupture: TOL vs ERCD Figure 7. Symptomatic Uterine Rupture: TOL vs ERCD Figure 8. Uterine Rupture: All Induction Methods vs Spontaneous Labor Figure 9. Cesarean Disruption: Oxytocin vs Spontaneous Labor Figure 10. Uterine Rupture: Prostaglandins vs Spontaneous Labor Table 2. Flamm Scoring System Tool: Included variables and point values Table 3. Flamm Scoring System Tool: Performance of Admission Score Table 4. Scoring System Tools: Relationship of risk score to successful VBAC Table 5. Responses to Vaginal vs Cesarean Delivery Table 6. Mother's Feelings After Cesarean Delivery Table 7. Father's Feelings After Cesarean Delivery Table 8. Individual Factors by General Categories Table 9. Demographic Factors Table 10. Past Indicators of VBAC Delivery Table 11. Current Indicators of VBAC Delivery ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 08chap4.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 131KB 10 pages Contents: Chapter 4. Conclusions: Summary of Evidence for Key Questions; Likelihood of Vaginal Delivery Rate; Predictive Tools; Maternal & Infant Health Outcomes; Uterine Rupture; Health Status; Patient Satisfaction; Cost and Healthcare Resources; Individual Factors; Patient Preferences; Provider Characteristics, Legislation, Access to Care ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 09chap5.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 49KB 6 pages Contents: Chapter 5. Future Research: Vaginal Delivery Rates; Predictive Tools; Maternal and Infant Health Outcomes; Uterine Rupture; Health Status; Patient Satisfaction; Cost and Healthcare Resources; Individual Factors; Patient Preferences; Implications for Legal, Health Care System, and Provider Characteristics ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 10refs.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 96KB 11 pages Contents: References ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 11biblio.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 384KB 59 pages Contents: Bibliography ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 12appa.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 52KB 6 pages Contents: Appendix A. Project Personnel, Technical Panel, and Peer Reviewers ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 13appb.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 23KB 1 page Contents: Appendix B. Procedures for Suspect or Missing Data ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 14appc.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 25KB 1 page Contents: Appendix C. Identifying Developed Countries ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 15appd.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 52KB 8 pages Contents: Appendix D. Search Strategies: All Topics ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 16appe.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 230KB 7 pages Contents: Appendix E. Studies Excluded at the Data Abstraction Phase By Topic and Reason ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 17appf-1.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 44KB 5 pages Contents: Appendix F. Criteria for Grading in the Internal Validity of Individual Studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 18appf-2.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 21KB 3 pages Contents: Appendix F. Criteria for Grading in the Internal Validity of Individual Studies (continued) ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 19appf-3.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 21KB 2 pages Contents: Appendix F. Criteria for Grading in the Internal Validity of Individual Studies (continued) ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 20appf-4.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 22KB 3 pages Contents: Appendix F. Criteria for Grading in the Internal Validity of Individual Studies (continued) ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 21appf-5.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 17KB 1 page Contents: Appendix F. Criteria for Grading in the Internal Validity of Individual Studies (continued) ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 22appf-6.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 20KB 2 pages Contents: Appendix F. Criteria for Grading in the Internal Validity of Individual Studies (continued) ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 23appf-7.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 28KB 4 pages Contents: Appendix F. Criteria for Grading in the Internal Validity of Individual Studies (continued) ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 24appg.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 35KB 3 pages Contents: Appendix G. Uterine Rupture Terminology Conference: September 5, 2002 ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 25acro.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 61KB 2 pages Contents: Acronyms and Abbreviations ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 26front2.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 29KB 1 page Contents: Volume 2 Title Page ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 27v2cont.doc Microsoft Word® Document MS Word® 2002 25KB 2 pages Contents: Volume 2 Table of Contents ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 28etbl1a.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 44KB 16 pages Contents: Evidence Table 1a. Study descriptors for vaginal delivery, maternal and infant outcomes-good or fair quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 29etbl1b.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 70KB 32 pages Contents: Evidence Table 1b. Study descriptors for vaginal delivery, maternal and infant outcomes-poor quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 30etbl2.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 18KB 2 pages Contents: Evidence Table 2. Vaginal delivery-good or fair quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 31etbl3a.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 39KB 9 pages Contents: Evidence Table 3a. Predictive tools-good or fair quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 32etbl3b.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 35KB 9 pages Contents: Evidence Table 3b. Predictive tools-poor quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 33etbl4a.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 33KB 10 pages Contents: Evidence Table 4a. Maternal outcomes-good or fair quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 34etbl4b.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 29KB 8 pages Contents: Evidence Table 4b. Maternal outcomes-poor quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 35etbl5a.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 26KB 4 pages Contents: Evidence Table 5a. Infant outcomes-good or fair quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 36etbl5b.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 23KB 3 pages Contents: Evidence Table 5b. Infant outcomes-poor quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 37etbl6.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 29KB 8 pages Contents: Evidence Table 6. Uterine rupture: terms, definitions, and predictors ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 38etbl7.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 22KB 4 pages Contents: Evidence Table 7. Uterine rupture details ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 39etbl8a.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 19KB 2 pages Contents: Evidence Table 8a. Patient satisfaction-good or fair quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 40etbl8b.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 20KB 2 pages Contents: Evidence Table 8b. Patient satisfaction-poor quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 41etbl9a.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 19KB 3 pages Contents: Evidence Table 9a. Economic evaluations-good or fair quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 42etbl9b.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 27KB 6 pages Contents: Evidence Table 9b. Economic evaluations-poor quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 43etbl10.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 42KB 12 pages Contents: Evidence Table 10. Healthcare resources-poor quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 44etbl11.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 29KB 8 pages Contents: Evidence Table 11. Individual factors-good or fair quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 45etb12a.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 38KB 9 pages Contents: Evidence Table 12a. Patient preferences-good or fair quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 46etb12b.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 26KB 4 pages Contents: Evidence Table 12b. Patient preferences-poor quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 47etbl13.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 17KB 2 pages Contents: Evidence Table 13. Legal & legislative factors-good quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 48etb14a.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 25KB 6 pages Contents: Evidence Table 14a. Guidelines-good or fair quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 49etb14b.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 24KB 6 pages Contents: Evidence Table 14b. Guidelines-poor quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 50etbl15.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 40KB 14 pages Contents: Evidence Table 15. Provider characteristics-poor quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 51etb16a.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 34KB 10 pages Contents: Evidence Table 16a. Hospital characteristics-good or fair quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 52etb16b.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 35KB 10 pages Contents: Evidence Table 16b. Hospital characteristics-poor quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 53etb17a.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 23KB 4 pages Contents: Evidence Table 17a. Insurance-good or fair quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________ 54etb17b.xls Microsoft Excel® Worksheet MS Excel® 2002 24KB 6 pages Contents: Evidence Table 17b. Insurance-poor quality studies ________________________________________________________________________________________________
AHRQ Publication No. 03-E018
Current as of March 2003
Internet Citation:
Vaginal Birth After Cesarean (VBAC): Volume 1. Evidence Report and Appendixes, Volume 2. Evidence Tables. File Inventory, Evidence Report/Technology Assessment Number 71. AHRQ Publication No. 03-E018, March 2003. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/vbacinv.htm
Return to Evidence-based Practice
Clinical Information
AHRQ Home Page
Department of Health and Human Services