At what price? A cost-effectiveness analysis comparing trial of labour after previous caesarean versus elective repeat caesarean delivery

Background: Elective repeat caesarean delivery (ERCD) rates have been increasing worldwide, thus prompting obstetric discourse on the risks and benefits for the mother and infant. Yet, these increasing rates also have major economic implications for the health care system. Given the dearth of information on the cost-effectiveness related to mode of delivery, the aim of this paper was to perform an economic evaluation on the costs and short-term maternal health consequences associated with a trial of labour after one previous caesarean delivery compared with ERCD for low risk women in Ireland.Methods: Using a decision analytic model, a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was performed where the measure of health gain was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over a six-week time horizon. A review of international literature was conducted to derive representative estimates of adverse maternal health outcomes following a trial of labour after caesarean (TOLAC) and ERCD. Delivery/procedure costs derived from primary data collection and combined both "bottom-up" and "top-down" costing estimations.Results: Maternal morbidities emerged in twice as many cases in the TOLAC group than the ERCD group. However, a TOLAC was found to be the most-effective method of delivery because it was substantially less expensive than ERCD ((sic)1,835.06 versus (sic)4,039.87 per women, respectively), and QALYs were modestly higher (0.84 versus 0.70). Our findings were supported by probabilistic sensitivity analysis.Conclusions: Clinicians need to be well informed of the benefits and risks of TOLAC among low risk women. Ideally, clinician-patient discourse would address differences in length of hospital stay and postpartum recovery time. While it is premature advocate a policy of TOLAC across maternity units, the results of the study prompt further analysis and repeat iterations, encouraging future studies to synthesis previous research and new and relevant evidence under a single comprehensive decision model.

The Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act 2013: Suicide, dignity and the Irish discourse on abortion

Accepted Version

Prediction and prevention of venous thrombosis in pregnancy

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains the leading cause of maternal mortality. Reports identified further research is required in obese and women post caesarean section (CS). Risk factors for VTE during pregnancy are periodically absent indicating the need for a simple and effective screening tool for pregnancy. Perturbation of the uteroplacental haemostasis has been implicated in placenta mediated pregnancy complications. This thesis had 4 main aims: 1) To investigate anticoagulant effects following a fixed thromboprophylaxis dose in healthy women post elective CS. 2) To evaluate the calibrated automated thrombogram (CAT) assay as a potential predictive tool for thrombosis in pregnancy. 3) To compare the anticoagulant effects of fixed versus weight adjusted thromboprophylaxis dose in morbidly obese pregnant women. 4) To investigate the LMWH effects on human haemostatic gene and antigen expression in placentae and plasma from the uteroplacental , maternal and fetal circulation. Tissue factor pathway inhibitor (TFPI), thrombin antithrombin (TAT), CAT and anti-Xa levels were analysed. Real-time PCR and ELISA were used to quantify mRNA and protein expression of TFPI and TF in placental tissue. In women post CS, anti-Xa levels do not reflect the full anticoagulant effects of LMWH. LMWH thromboprophylaxis in this healthy cohort of patients appears to have a sustained effect in reducing excess thrombin production post elective CS. The results of this study suggest that predicting VTE in pregnant women using CAT assay is not possible at present time. The prothrombotic state in pregnant morbidly obese women was substantially attenuated by weight adjusted but not at fixed LMWH doses. LMWH may be effective in reducing in- vivo thrombin production in the uteroplacental circulation of thrombophilic women. All these results collectively suggest that at appropriate dosage, LMWH is effective in attenuating excess thrombin generation, in low risk pregnant women post caesarean section or moderate to high risk pregnant women who are morbidly obese or tested positive for thrombophilia. The results of the studies provided data to inform evidence-based practice to improve the outcome for pregnant women at risk of thrombosis.

Caesarean section and subsequent pregnancy outcome: a Danish register-based cohort study

Background and Aims: Caesarean section rates have increased in recent decades and the effects on subsequent pregnancy outcome are largely unknown. Prior research has hypothesised that Caesarean section delivery may lead to an increased risk of subsequent stillbirth, miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy and sub-fertility. Structure and Methods: Papers 1-3 are systematic reviews with meta-analyses. Papers 4-6 are findings from this thesis on the rate of subsequent stillbirth, miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy and live birth by mode of delivery. Results Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: A 23% increased odds of subsequent stillbirth; no increase in odds of subsequent ectopic pregnancy and a 10% reduction in the odds of subsequent live birth among women with a previous Caesarean section were found in the various meta-analyses. Danish cohorts: Results from the Danish Civil Registration System (CRS) cohort revealed a small increased rate of subsequent stillbirth and ectopic pregnancy among women with a primary Caesarean section, which remained in the analyses by type of Caesarean. No increased rate of miscarriage was found among women with a primary Caesarean section. In the CRS data, women with a primary Caesarean section had a significantly reduced rate of subsequent live birth particularly among women with primary elective and maternal-requested Caesarean sections. In the Aarhus Birth Cohort, overall the effect of mode of delivery on the rate and time to next live birth was minimal. Conclusions: Primary Caesarean section was associated with a small increased rate of stillbirth and ectopic pregnancy, which may be in part due to underlying medical conditions. No increased rate of miscarriage was found. A reduced rate of subsequent live birth was found among Caesarean section in the CRS data. In the smaller ABC cohort, a small reduction in rate of subsequent live birth was found among women with a primary Caesarean section and is most likely due to maternal choice rather than any ill effects of the Caesarean. The findings of this study, the largest and most comprehensive to date will be of significant interest to health care providers and women globally.

Cesarean section and rate of subsequent stillbirth, miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy: a Danish register-based cohort study

Background: With cesarean section rates increasing worldwide, clarity regarding negative effects is essential. This study aimed to investigate the rate of subsequent stillbirth, miscarriage, and ectopic pregnancy following primary cesarean section, controlling for confounding by indication. Methods and Findings: We performed a population-based cohort study using Danish national registry data linking various registers. The cohort included primiparous women with a live birth between January 1, 1982, and December 31, 2010 (n = 832,996), with follow-up until the next event (stillbirth, miscarriage, or ectopic pregnancy) or censoring by live birth, death, emigration, or study end. Cox regression models for all types of cesarean sections, sub-group analyses by type of cesarean, and competing risks analyses for the causes of stillbirth were performed. An increased rate of stillbirth (hazard ratio [HR] 1.14, 95% CI 1.01, 1.28) was found in women with primary cesarean section compared to spontaneous vaginal delivery, giving a theoretical absolute risk increase (ARI) of 0.03% for stillbirth, and a number needed to harm (NNH) of 3,333 women. Analyses by type of cesarean section showed similarly increased rates for emergency (HR 1.15, 95% CI 1.01, 1.31) and elective cesarean (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.91, 1.35), although not statistically significant in the latter case. An increased rate of ectopic pregnancy was found among women with primary cesarean overall (HR 1.09, 95% CI 1.04, 1.15) and by type (emergency cesarean, HR 1.09, 95% CI 1.03, 1.15, and elective cesarean, HR 1.12, 95% CI 1.03, 1.21), yielding an ARI of 0.1% and a NNH of 1,000 women for ectopic pregnancy. No increased rate of miscarriage was found among women with primary cesarean, with maternally requested cesarean section associated with a decreased rate of miscarriage (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.60, 0.85). Limitations include incomplete data on maternal body mass index, maternal smoking, fertility treatment, causes of stillbirth, and maternally requested cesarean section, as well as lack of data on antepartum/intrapartum stillbirth and gestational age for stillbirth and miscarriage. Conclusions: This study found that cesarean section is associated with a small increased rate of subsequent stillbirth and ectopic pregnancy. Underlying medical conditions, however, and confounding by indication for the primary cesarean delivery account for at least part of this increased rate. These findings will assist women and health-care providers to reach more informed decisions regarding mode of delivery.

Private health care coverage and increased risk of obstetric intervention

Background: When clinically indicated, common obstetric interventions can greatly improve maternal and neonatal outcomes. However, variation in intervention rates suggests that obstetric practice may not be solely driven by case criteria. Methods: Differences in obstetric intervention rates by private and public status in Ireland were examined using nationally representative hospital discharge data. A retrospective cohort study was performed on childbirth hospitalisations occurring between 2005 and 2010. Multivariate logistic regression analysis with correction for the relative risk was conducted to determine the risk of obstetric intervention (caesarean delivery, operative vaginal delivery, induction of labour or episiotomy) by private or public status while adjusting for obstetric risk factors. Results: 403,642 childbirth hospitalisations were reviewed; approximately one-third of maternities (30.2%) were booked privately. After controlling for relevant obstetric risk factors, women with private coverage were more likely to have an elective caesarean delivery (RR: 1.48; 95% CI: 1.45-1.51), an emergency caesarean delivery (RR: 1.13; 95% CI: 1.12-1.16) and an operative vaginal delivery (RR: 1.25; 95% CI: 1.22-1.27). Compared to women with public coverage who had a vaginal delivery, women with private coverage were 40% more likely to have an episiotomy (RR: 1.40; 95% CI: 1.38-1.43). Conclusions: Irrespective of obstetric risk factors, women who opted for private maternity care were significantly more likely to have an obstetric intervention. To better understand both clinical and non-clinical dynamics, future studies of examining health care coverage status and obstetric intervention would ideally apply mixed-method techniques.