{"title":"预测剖宫产后阴道分娩的模型:范围审查。","authors":"Hong Cui, Wenhui Shan, Quan Na, Tong Liu","doi":"10.1186/s12884-024-07101-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Women who are pregnant again after a prior cesarean section are faced with the choice between a vaginal trial and another cesarean section. Vaginal delivery is safer for mothers and babies, but face the risk of trial labor failure. Predictive models can evaluate the success rate of vaginal trial labor after cesarean section, which will help obstetricians and pregnant women choose the appropriate delivery method.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To review the existing prediction models of vaginal delivery after cesaean.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Seven databases, including CNKI, Wanfang Data, Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database, China Biomedical Literature Database, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, were searched for studies on the predictive model of VBAC from inception to July 20, 2022. Two researchers independently screened the literature and extracted the data. The risk of bias and applicability of the included researches was evaluated using the Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-six studies that covered 26 models were included. The overall property of the included models was good, but validation of the included models was insufficient. The methodological quality of the included studies was generally low, with 3 studies rated as having a low risk of bias and 23 studies rated as having a high risk of bias. The main predictors in the models were the Bishop score, history of vaginal delivery, neonatal weight, maternal age, and BMI.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although a variety of prediction models have been developed globally, the methodology of these studies has limitations and the models have not been adequately validated. In the future, more prospective and high-quality research is needed to develop visual models to serve clinical work more effectively and conveniently. Obstetricians or midwives could use predictive models to help a woman choose the right delivery method.</p>","PeriodicalId":9033,"journal":{"name":"BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth","volume":"24 1","pages":"869"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11673613/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Models for predicting vaginal birth after cesarean section: scoping review.\",\"authors\":\"Hong Cui, Wenhui Shan, Quan Na, Tong Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12884-024-07101-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Women who are pregnant again after a prior cesarean section are faced with the choice between a vaginal trial and another cesarean section. Vaginal delivery is safer for mothers and babies, but face the risk of trial labor failure. Predictive models can evaluate the success rate of vaginal trial labor after cesarean section, which will help obstetricians and pregnant women choose the appropriate delivery method.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To review the existing prediction models of vaginal delivery after cesaean.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Seven databases, including CNKI, Wanfang Data, Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database, China Biomedical Literature Database, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, were searched for studies on the predictive model of VBAC from inception to July 20, 2022. Two researchers independently screened the literature and extracted the data. The risk of bias and applicability of the included researches was evaluated using the Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-six studies that covered 26 models were included. The overall property of the included models was good, but validation of the included models was insufficient. The methodological quality of the included studies was generally low, with 3 studies rated as having a low risk of bias and 23 studies rated as having a high risk of bias. The main predictors in the models were the Bishop score, history of vaginal delivery, neonatal weight, maternal age, and BMI.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although a variety of prediction models have been developed globally, the methodology of these studies has limitations and the models have not been adequately validated. In the future, more prospective and high-quality research is needed to develop visual models to serve clinical work more effectively and conveniently. Obstetricians or midwives could use predictive models to help a woman choose the right delivery method.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9033,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"869\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11673613/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-024-07101-x\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-024-07101-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:先前剖宫产手术后再次怀孕的妇女面临阴道试验和再次剖宫产的选择。阴道分娩对母亲和婴儿更安全,但面临试产失败的风险。预测模型可以评估剖宫产术后阴道试产成功率,帮助产科医生和孕妇选择合适的分娩方式。目的:综述现有剖宫产后阴道分娩预测模型。方法:检索中国知网(CNKI)、万方数据、中国科技期刊库、中国生物医学文献库、PubMed、Embase、Web of Science等7个数据库,检索自成立至2022年7月20日VBAC预测模型的相关研究。两位研究者独立筛选文献并提取数据。采用预测模型偏倚风险评估工具对纳入研究的偏倚风险和适用性进行评价。结果:共纳入26项研究,涵盖26种模型。纳入模型的总体性能良好,但纳入模型的验证不足。纳入研究的方法学质量普遍较低,有3项研究被评为低偏倚风险,23项研究被评为高偏倚风险。模型中的主要预测因子为Bishop评分、阴道分娩史、新生儿体重、产妇年龄和BMI。结论:尽管全球已经开发了各种预测模型,但这些研究的方法存在局限性,模型尚未得到充分验证。未来需要更多前瞻性和高质量的研究来开发视觉模型,使其更有效、更便捷地服务于临床工作。产科医生或助产士可以使用预测模型来帮助妇女选择正确的分娩方式。
Models for predicting vaginal birth after cesarean section: scoping review.
Background: Women who are pregnant again after a prior cesarean section are faced with the choice between a vaginal trial and another cesarean section. Vaginal delivery is safer for mothers and babies, but face the risk of trial labor failure. Predictive models can evaluate the success rate of vaginal trial labor after cesarean section, which will help obstetricians and pregnant women choose the appropriate delivery method.
Objective: To review the existing prediction models of vaginal delivery after cesaean.
Methods: Seven databases, including CNKI, Wanfang Data, Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database, China Biomedical Literature Database, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, were searched for studies on the predictive model of VBAC from inception to July 20, 2022. Two researchers independently screened the literature and extracted the data. The risk of bias and applicability of the included researches was evaluated using the Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool.
Results: Twenty-six studies that covered 26 models were included. The overall property of the included models was good, but validation of the included models was insufficient. The methodological quality of the included studies was generally low, with 3 studies rated as having a low risk of bias and 23 studies rated as having a high risk of bias. The main predictors in the models were the Bishop score, history of vaginal delivery, neonatal weight, maternal age, and BMI.
Conclusions: Although a variety of prediction models have been developed globally, the methodology of these studies has limitations and the models have not been adequately validated. In the future, more prospective and high-quality research is needed to develop visual models to serve clinical work more effectively and conveniently. Obstetricians or midwives could use predictive models to help a woman choose the right delivery method.
期刊介绍:
BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of pregnancy and childbirth. The journal welcomes submissions on the biomedical aspects of pregnancy, breastfeeding, labor, maternal health, maternity care, trends and sociological aspects of pregnancy and childbirth.