Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-5wvtr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-23T13:20:35.694Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 6 - Self-sustaining mechanisms

from Section 1 - A wake-up call

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2015

Paul Reuwer ,
Hein Bruinse  and
Arie Franx
Paul Reuwer
Affiliation:
Department of Obstetrics, St Elisabeth Hospital, Tilburg
Hein Bruinse
Affiliation:
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Utrecht University Medical Center
Arie Franx
Affiliation:
Department of Obstetrics, St Elisabeth Hospital, Tilburg
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Proactive Support of Labor
The Challenge of Normal Childbirth
 , pp. 34 - 48
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Murphy, M, McDonagh, Hull, P. Choosing Cesarean Delivery: A Natural Birth Plan. Prometheus Books; 2012Google Scholar
McKinnie, V, Swift, SE, Wang, W, et al. The effect of pregnancy and mode of delivery on the prevalence of urinary and fecal incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005;193:512–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barret, G, Peacock, J, Victor, CR, Manyonda, I. Cesarean section and postnatal sexual health. Birth 2005;32:306–11Google Scholar
Handa, VL, Brubaker, L, Falf, SJ. Urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse associated with pregnancy and childbirth. UpToDate. Accessed October 2014Google Scholar
Bahl, R, Strachan, B, Murphy, DJ. Pelvic floor morbidity at 3 years after instrumental delivery and cesarean delivery in the second stage of labor and the impact of a subsequent delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005;192:789–94CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Durnea, CM, Khashan, AS, Kenny, LC, et al. The role of prepregnancy pelvic floor dysfunction in postnatal pelvic morbidity in primiparous women. Int Urogynecol J 2014;25:1363–74CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stafne, SN, Salvesen, KÅ, Romundstad, PR, et al. Does regular exercise including pelvic floor muscle training prevent urinary and anal incontinence during pregnancy? A randomised controlled trial. Br J Obstet Gynaec 2012;119:1270–80CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
ACOG Committee Opinion. Surgery and patient choice: the ethics of decision making. Obstet Gynecol 2003;102:1101–6Google Scholar
Leeman, L, Plante, LA. Patient-choice vaginal delivery? Ann Fam Med 2006;4:265–8Google Scholar
Metz, TD, Scott, JR. Contemporary management of VBAC. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2012;55:1026–32Google Scholar
Kotaska, A, Menticoglou, S, Gagnon, R, et al. Maternal Fetal Medicine Committee; Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. Vaginal delivery of breech presentation. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2009;31:557–66, 567–78.Google Scholar
Cohen, D. FDA official: “clinical trial system is broken”. Br Med J 2013;347:f16980Google Scholar
Spence, D. Evidence based medicine is broken. Br Med J 2014;348:g22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenhalgh, T, Howick, J, Maskrey, N; Evidence Based Medicine Renaissance Group. Evidence based medicine: a movement in crisis? Br Med J 2014;348:g3725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prusava, K, Churcher, L, Tyler, A, Lokugamage, AU. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecology guidelines: How evidence-based are they? J Obstet Gynaecol 2014;12:1–6 (Epub ahead of print)Google Scholar
Allen, D, Harkins, K. Too much evidence? Lancet 2005;365:1768CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NICE-guidelines. Intrapartum care: care of healthy women and their babies during childbirth. 2007. RCOG press. Updated 2010 www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg55Google Scholar
Howick, J. The evidence based renaissance: Holy Grail or poisoned chalice BioMed Central Blog 2014. http://biomedcentral.com/bmcblogGoogle Scholar
McIntyre, KM. Medicolegal implications of consensus statements. Chest 1995;108:502–5Google Scholar
Hyams, AL, Brandenburg, JA, Lipsitz, SR, et al. Practice guidelines and malpractice litigation: a two-way street. Ann Intern Med 1995;122:440–5Google Scholar
Hirshfeld, EB. Should practice parameters be the standard of care in malpractice litigation? JAMA 1991;266:2886–91Google Scholar
Ioannidis, JP. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med 2005;2:e124Google Scholar
Kotaska, A. Inappropriate use of randomised trials to evaluate complex phenomena: case study of vaginal breech delivery. Br Med J 2004;329:039–42CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Menticoglou, SM, Hall, PF. Routine induction of labour at 41 weeks gestation: Nonsensus consensus. Br J Obstet Gynaec 2002;109:485–91Google Scholar
Keirse, MJ. Commentary: the freezing aftermath of a hot randomized controlled trial. Birth 2011;38:165–7Google Scholar
Tonelli, MR. The philosophical limits of evidence based medicine. Acad Med 1998;73:1234–40CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moynihan, R, Doust, JC, Henry, D. Preventing overdiagnosis: how to stop harming the healthy. Br Med J 2012;344:e3502Google Scholar
Keirse, MJNC. Home births: gone away, gone astray, and here to stay. Birth 2010;37:341–6Google Scholar
Devries, RG. The warp of evidence-based medicine: lessons from Dutch maternity care. Int J Health Serv 2004;34:595–623Google Scholar
Keirse, MJ. Elective induction, selective deduction, and cesarean section. Birth 2010;37:252–56CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bewley, S, Shennan, A. HYPITAT and the fallacy of pregnancy interruption. Lancet 2010;375:119Google Scholar
Greene, MF. Delivering twins. N Engl J Med 2013;369:1365–6Google Scholar
Mishanina, E, Rogozinska, E, Thatthi, T, et al. Use of labour induction and risk of cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. CMAJ 2014;168:665–73Google Scholar
Inducing labour reduces risk of caesarean delivery by 12%, finds analysis. Br Med J 6 May 2014; www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g2960/rr/696718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cesarean deliveries drop 12% with induction. Medscape 2014; www.medscape.com/viewarticle/824211Google Scholar
Caughey, AB, Sundaram, V, Kaimal, AJ, et al. Systematic review: elective induction of labor versus expectant management of pregnancy. Ann Intern Med 2009;151:252–63Google Scholar
Gülmezoglu, AM, Crowther, CA, Middleton, P, et al. Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; CD004945CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wennerholm, UB, Hagberg, H, Brorsson, B, et al. Induction of labor versus expectant management for post-date pregnancy: Is there sufficient evidence for a change in clinical practice? Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2009;88:6–17Google Scholar
Wood, S, Cooper, S, Ross, S. Does induction of labour increase the risk of caesarean section? A systematic review and meta-analysis of trials in women with intact membranes. Br J Obstet Gynaec 2014;121:674–85 discussion 685CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hannah, ME, Hannah, WJ, Hellmann, J, et al. The Canadian Multicenter Post-term Pregnancy Trial Group. Induction of labor as compared with serial antenatal monitoring in post-term pregnancy. A randomized controlled trial. N Engl J Med 1992;326:1587–92CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keirse, MJ. Postterm pregnancy: New lessons from an unresolved debate. Birth 1993;20:102–105Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstetric Care Consensus No. 1: Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2014;123:693–711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderson, J1, Redshaw, M. Women’s experience of induction of labor: a mixed methods study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2013;92:1159–67Google Scholar
Hildingsson, I, Karlström, A, Nystedt, A. Women’s experiences of induction of labour–findings from a Swedish regional study. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2011;51:151–7Google Scholar
Enabor, OO, Olayemi, OO, Bello, FA, Adedokun, BO. Cervical ripening and induction of labour awareness, knowledge and perception of antenatal attendees in Ibadan, Nigeria. J Obstet Gynaecol 2012;3:652–56Google Scholar
Shetty, A, Burt, R, Rice, P, Templeton, A. Women’s perceptions, expectations and satisfaction with induced labour—a questionnaire-based study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2005;123:56–61CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nuutila, M, Halmesmäki, E, Hillesmaa, V, Ylikorkala, O. Women’s anticipations of and experiences with induction of labor. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1999;78:704–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bramadat, IJ. Induction of labor: an integrated review. Health Care Women Int. 1994;15:135–48Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×