Repeat cesarean section and primary elective cesarean section: Recently trained obstetrician-gynecologist practice patterns and opinions

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, Indianapolis, Indiana, United States
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (Impact Factor: 3.97). 07/2005; 192(6):1872-5; discussion 1875-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.01.046
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This study was undertaken to determine opinions of obstetrician-gynecologists regarding vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) section and elective cesarean section.
A questionnaire was administered to obstetrician-gynecologists attending 2 review courses.
Of 500 obstetrician-gynecologists, 304 completed the survey for a response rate of 61%. Most (92%) counseled VBAC candidates differently, and 84% quoted differential VBAC completion rates on the basis of the indication for prior cesarean section. Uterine rupture was virtually always discussed (99%). Pelvic floor risks were infrequently discussed with urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, and fecal incontinence discussed by less than one third of obstetricians (30%, 28%, and 25%, respectively). Fifty-nine percent of physicians would perform a primary elective cesarean section, and 67% would perform a primary elective cesarean section specifically to prevent pelvic floor disorders.
Two thirds of recent graduates are willing to perform an elective cesarean section to prevent pelvic floor injury. Most offer VBAC; however, less than a third include risk of pelvic floor injury in their informed consent discussions.

  • Source
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The formula χ=3μ−3b+5νχ=3μ−3b+5ν in Corollary 2.2 in [Hernández, X., Miret, J., Xambó, S., 2007. Computing the characteristic numbers of the variety of nodal plane cubics in P3P3. Journal of Symbolic Computation 42 (1–2), 192–202] should be χ=−9μ−3b+5νχ=−9μ−3b+5ν. This mistake does not affect the rest of the paper. We also take the opportunity to supply details of the proof that were only hinted at there.
    Journal of Symbolic Computation 04/2009; 44(4):417–418. DOI:10.1016/j.jsc.2008.10.003 · 0.71 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Whether practice differences exist between the sexes is a question of clinical and educational significance. The obstetrician-gynecologist (ob-gyn) workforce has been shifting to majority women. An examination of sex differences in ob-gyn practice contributes to the discussion about how the changing workforce may impact women's healthcare. We sought to review survey studies to assess whether there are specific topics in which differences in attitudes, opinions, and practice patterns between male and female ob-gyns are apparent. We conducted a systematic review to identify all survey studies of ob-gyns from the years 2002-2012. A total of 93 studies were reviewed to identify statements of sex differences and categorized by conceptual theme. Sex differences were identified in a number of areas. In general, women report more supportive attitudes toward abortion. A number of differences were identified with regard to workforce issues, such as women earning 23% less than their male counterparts as reported in 1 study and working an average of 4.1 fewer hours per week than men in another study. Men typically provide higher self-ratings than women in a number of areas. Other noted findings include men tending toward more pharmaceutical therapies and women making more referrals for medical conditions. Although a number of areas of difference were identified, the impact of such differences is yet to be determined. Additional research may help to clarify the reasons for such differences and their potential impact on patients.
    Obstetrical & gynecological survey 03/2013; 68(3):235-53. DOI:10.1097/OGX.0b013e318286f0aa · 2.36 Impact Factor