Advertisement

Early childhood educational outcomes of children associated with vaginal birth after cesarean delivery

      BACKGROUND

      Rates of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery have decreased and cesarean delivery rates have increased in the last 2 decades. Evidence on short-term neonatal outcomes is available, but data on long-term childhood outcomes following vaginal birth after cesarean delivery are insufficient. Long-term childhood outcome data are essential in decision-making regarding mode of delivery.

      OBJECTIVE

      This study aimed to evaluate the association between delivery mode and long-term educational outcomes of the children of pregnant individuals with a previous cesarean delivery.

      STUDY DESIGN

      This was a retrospective cohort study linking Rhode Island third-grade education data from 2014 to 2017 to birth certificate data. Data were obtained from a statewide database using Department of Education data, and were linked to Department of Health birth certificate data. Participants were children of multiparous women who were term, singleton births without congenital anomalies. Children delivered by primary cesarean delivery were excluded. The exposure was mode of delivery classified as vaginal birth after cesarean delivery, repeated cesarean delivery, or repeated vaginal birth. The primary outcome was children's third-grade reading and math proficiency. Bivariate analyses were conducted to assess differences in demographic variables. Bivariable and multivariable log-binomial regression was used to examine the association between subject proficiency and predictors including mode of delivery, maternal education, sex, child race or ethnicity, and lunch subsidy.

      RESULTS

      Of the 10,923 children who met the inclusion criteria, 2.0% were delivered by vaginal birth after cesarean delivery, 22.0% by repeated cesarean delivery, and 76.0% by repeated vaginal delivery. After adjustment for confounders, there was no difference in reading proficiency (adjusted risk ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.84–1.15) or math proficiency (adjusted risk ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.84–1.15) between those born by vaginal birth after cesarean delivery and those born by repeated cesarean delivery. There was no difference found in either proficiency between children born by repeated vaginal birth and those born by repeated cesarean delivery (reading: adjusted risk ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.93–1.01; math: adjusted risk ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.92–1.02).

      CONCLUSION

      In comparison with repeated cesarean delivery, both vaginal birth after cesarean delivery and repeated vaginal birth were not associated with differences in educational outcomes. This may aid in counseling about long-term safety outcomes regarding vaginal birth after cesarean delivery and may assist in shared decision-making when selecting between trial of labor after cesarean delivery and repeated cesarean delivery.

      Key words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology MFM
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Uddin SF
        • Simon AE.
        Rates and success rates of trial of labor after cesarean delivery in the United States, 1990-2009.
        Matern Child Health J. 2013; 17: 1309-1314
        • Martin JA
        • Hamilton BE
        • Osterman MJK
        • Driscoll AK.
        Births: final data for 2018.
        Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2019; 68: 1-47
      1. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 205 Summary: vaginal birth after cesarean delivery.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2019; 133: 393-395
        • Macones GA
        • Peipert J
        • Nelson DB
        • et al.
        Maternal complications with vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: a multicenter study.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 193: 1656-1662
        • Silver RM
        • Landon MB
        • Rouse DJ
        • et al.
        Maternal morbidity associated with multiple repeat cesarean deliveries.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2006; 107: 1226-1232
        • Landon MB
        • Hauth JC
        • Leveno KJ
        • et al.
        Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with a trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery.
        N Engl J Med. 2004; 351: 2581-2589
        • Cox KJ.
        Counseling women with a previous cesarean birth: toward a shared decision-making partnership.
        J Midwifery Womens Health. 2014; 59: 237-245
        • Young CB
        • Liu S
        • Muraca GM
        • et al.
        Mode of delivery after a previous cesarean birth, and associated maternal and neonatal morbidity.
        CMAJ. 2018; 190: E556-E564
        • Guise JM
        • Denman MA
        • Emeis C
        • et al.
        Vaginal birth after cesarean: new insights on maternal and neonatal outcomes.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 115: 1267-1278
      2. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference statement: vaginal birth after cesarean: new insights March 8-10, 2010.
        Semin Perinatol. 2010; 34: 293-307
      3. Common Core State Standards Initiative; 2022. Available from: http://www.corestandards.org/. Accessed 8/25/22.

        • Kotelchuck M.
        An evaluation of the Kessner Adequacy of prenatal Care Index and a proposed adequacy of prenatal care utilization index.
        Am J Public Health. 1994; 84: 1414-1420
        • Fagerberg MC
        • Marsal K
        • Källen K.
        Neonatal outcome after trial of labor or elective cesarean section in relation to the indication for the previous cesarean delivery.
        Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2013; 92: 1151-1158
        • Studsgaard A
        • Skorstengaard M
        • Glavind J
        • Hvidman L
        • Uldbjerg N.
        Trial of labor compared to repeat cesarean section in women with no other risk factors than a prior cesarean delivery.
        Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2013; 92: 1256-1263
        • Sentilhes L
        • Vayssière C
        • Beucher G
        • et al.
        Delivery for women with a previous cesarean: guidelines for clinical practice from the French College of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (CNGOF).
        Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013; 170: 25-32
        • Kikuchi J
        • Ranjit A
        • Jiang W
        • Witkop C
        • Hamlin L
        • Koehlmoos TP.
        Early childhood outcomes among infants born by vaginal birth after cesarean and repeat cesarean delivery in the military health system.
        Mil Med. 2021; 186: 1124-1128
        • Black M
        • Bhattacharya S
        • Philip S
        • Norman JE
        • McLernon DJ.
        Planned repeat cesarean section at term and adverse childhood health outcomes: a record-linkage study.
        PLoS Med. 2016; 13e1001973
        • Fitzpatrick KE
        • Kurinczuk JJ
        • Bhattacharya S
        • Quigley MA.
        Planned mode of delivery after previous cesarean section and short-term maternal and perinatal outcomes: a population-based record linkage cohort study in Scotland.
        PLoS Med. 2019; 16e1002913
        • Harding JF
        • Morris PA
        • Hughes D
        The relationship between maternal education and children's academic outcomes: a theoretical framework.
        J Marriage Fam. 2015; 77: 60-76
        • Cahill AG
        • Stamilio DM
        • Odibo AO
        • Peipert J
        • Stevens E
        • Macones GA.
        Racial disparity in the success and complications of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2008; 111: 654-658
        • Gilbert A
        • Benjamin A
        • Abenhaim HA.
        Does education level influence the decision to undergo elective repeat caesarean section among women with a previous caesarean section?.
        J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2010; 32: 942-947
      4. WHO Recommendations Non-Clinical Interventions to Reduce Unnecessary Caesarean Sections. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK532672/. Accessed 8/25/22

      5. Barth Cottrell EK, Wasson N, Wagner J, et al. Vaginal Birth After Cesarean: Developing and Prioritizing a Future Research Agenda [Internet]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2012 May. (Future Research Needs Papers, No. 15.) Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK196169/. Accessed 8/25/22.

      6. Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Reduce Cesarean births among low-risk women with no prior births- MICH-06. [Internet]. Healthy People 2030. US Department of Health and Human Services. Available from: https://health.gov/healthypeople/objectives-and-data/browse-objectives/pregnancy-and-childbirth/reduce-cesarean-births-among-low-risk-women-no-prior-births-mich-06. Accessed 8/25/22

        • Grobman WA
        • Lai Y
        • Landon MB
        • et al.
        Development of a nomogram for prediction of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2007; 109: 806-812
        • Metz TD
        • Stoddard GJ
        • Henry E
        • Jackson M
        • Holmgren C
        • Esplin S
        Simple, validated vaginal birth after cesarean delivery prediction model for use at the time of admission.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2013; 122: 571-578
        • Flamm BL
        • Geiger AM.
        Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: an admission scoring system.
        Obstet Gynecol. 1997; 90: 907-910
      7. Early Warning! Why Reading by the End of Third Grade Matters [Internet]. Annie E Casey Foundation. 2010. Available from: https://ed.psu.edu/sites/default/files/inline-files/Anne%;20E%20Casey%202010%20Early%20Warning%20Special_Report_Executive_Summary.pdf. Accessed 8/25/22

        • Northam S
        • Knapp TR.
        The reliability and validity of birth certificates.
        J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2006; 35: 3-12