The determinants of obstetricians’ willingness to undertake delivery by vaginal birth after cesarean section in Taiwan

References

• Savage W. The rising cesarean section rate: a loss of obstetric skill? Obstet Bynaecol. 2007;27:339–346. doi:10.1080/01443610701337916
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Ventura SJ. Births: preliminary data for 2010. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2011;60(2):1–25. Available from: www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr60/nvsr60/02.pdf. Accessed July 24, 2019.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mazzoni A, Althabe F, Liu NH, et al. Women’s preference for cesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. BJOG. 2011;118:391–399. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02793.x21134103
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mozurkewich EL, Hutton EK. Elective repeat cesarean delivery versus trial of labor: a meta-analysis of the literature from 1989 to 1999. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;183:1187. doi:10.1067/mob.2000.10889011084565
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silver RM, Landon MB, Rouse DJ, et al. Maternal morbidity associated with multiple cesarean deliveries. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107:1226–1232. doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000219750.79480.8416738145
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chazotte C, Cohen WR. Catastrophic complications of previous cesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1990;163:738–742. doi:10.1016/0002-9378(90)91059-L2403155
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flamm BL, Goings JR, Liu Y, Wolde-Tsadik G. Elective repeat cesarean delivery versus trial of labor: a prospective multicenter study. Obstet Gynecol. 1994;83:927–932. doi:10.1097/00006250-199406000-000058190433
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Panel. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development conference statement: vaginal birth after cesarean: new insights, March 8–10, 2010. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115:1279–1295. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181e459e520502301
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kieser KE, Baskett TF. A 10-year population-based study of uterine rupture. Obstet Gynecol. 2002;100:749–753.12383544
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landon MB. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Clin Perinatol. 2008;35:491–504,ix–x. doi:10.1016/j.clp.2008.07.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Little MO, Lyerly AD, Mitchell LM, et al. Mode of delivery: toward responsible inclusion of patient preferences. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112:913–918. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181888fd818827136
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Okada H, Kuhn C, Feillet H, et al. The ‘hygiene hypothesis’ for autoimmune and allergic diseases: an update. Clin Exp Immunol. 2010; 160(1):1–9. [PMC free article] [PubMed].
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bach JF. The effect of infections on susceptibility to autoimmune and allergic diseases. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(12):911–920. doi:10.1056/NEJMra02010012239261
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grobman WA, Peaceman AM, Socol ML. Cost-effectiveness of elective cesarean delivery after one prior low transverse cesarean. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;95(5):745–751.10775741
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graseck AS, Odibo AO, Tuuli M, Roehl KA, Macones GA, Cahill AG. Normal first stage of labor in women undergoing trial of labor after Cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;119(4):732–737. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e31824c096c22433336
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cahill AG, Macones GA. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: evidence-based practice. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2007;50:518–525. doi:10.1097/GRF.0b013e31804bde7b17513937
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists ACOG. Vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery. ACOG practice bulletin no. 115. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116:450–463. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181eeb25120664418
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Holmgren C, Scott JR, Porter TF, Esplin MS, Bardsley T. Uterine rupture with attempted vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Decision-to-delivery time and neonatal outcome. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;119:725–731. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e318249a1d722433335
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fu J-C, Xirasagar S, Liu JH, Probst JC. Cesarean and VBAC rates among immigrant vs. native-born women: a retrospective observational study from Taiwan Cesarean delivery and VBAC among immigrant women in Taiwan. BMC Public Health. 2010;10:548. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-10-54820831813
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hsu CY, Lo JC, Chang JH, Chen CP, Yu S, Huang FY. Cesarean births in Taiwan. Int J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;96(1):57–61. doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2006.09.011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang K Analysis of vaginal birth after caesarean section: a population-based study from 1997-2010 in Taiwan, research project of Cheng-Hsin General Hospital, Taiwan; 2013 (in Chinese).
   Google Scholar
• MacDorman M, Declercq E, Menacker F. Recent trends and patterns in cesarean and vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) deliveries in the United States. Clin Perinatol. 2011;38(2):179–192. doi:10.1016/j.clp.2011.03.00721645788
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith V, EU COST action, IS0907: childbirth cultures, concerns, and consequences: creating a dynamic EU framework for optimal maternity care. Report of the Short Term Scientific Mission (STSM), Vaginal Birth after Caesarean Section: Culture, Character and Concerns; 1 2012
   Google Scholar
• National Statistics. Department of registration, Ministry of Interior, Taiwan. Available from http://eng.stat.gov.tw/mp.asp?mp=5. Accessed 103 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Scott JR. Vaginal birth after cesarean delivery: a commonsense approach. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;118:342–50.x. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182245b3921775851
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson DN. Jackson Personality Inventory-Rivised Manual [CD-ROM]. Port Huron, MI: Sigma Assessment Systems Inc; 2004.
   Google Scholar
• Pearson SD, Goldman L, Orav J, et al. Triage decisions for emergency department patients with chest pain: do physicians’ risk attitudes make the difference? J Gen Intern Med. 1995;10:557–564. doi:10.1007/bf026403658576772
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Güngör D, Bornstein MH, Leersnyder JD, Cote L, Ceulemans E, Mesquita B. Acculturation of personality: a three-culture study of Japanese, Japanese Americans, and European Americans. J Cross Cult Psychol. 2013;44(5):701–718. doi:10.1177/002202211247074923935211
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson DN. Jackson Personality Inventory – Revised Manual. Port Huron, MI: Sigma Assessment Systems, Inc; 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Fetvadjiev VH, Meiring D, Van de Vijver FJR. Measures of personality across cultural In: Boyle GJ, Saklofske DH, Matthews G, editors. Book Measures of Personality and Social Psychological Constructs. Cambridge (MA): Academic Press; 2014:P765.
   Google Scholar
• Baldwin RL, Green JW, Shaw JL, et al. Physicians risk attitudes and hospitalization of infants with bronchiolitis. Acad Emerg Med. 2005;12:142–146. doi:10.1197/j.aem.2004.10.00215692135
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robinson G. Do general practitioners’ risk-taking propensities and learning styles influence their continuing medical education preferences? Med Teach. 2002;24:71–78. doi:10.1080/0142159012009107812098462
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiscella K, Franks P, Zwanziger J, et al. Risk aversion and costs. A comparison of family physicians and general internists. J Fam Prac. 2007;49:7–12.
   Google Scholar
• Franks P, Williams GC, Zwansiger J, Mooney C, Sorbero M. Why do physicians vary so widely in their referral rates? J Gen Intern Med. 1995;10:557–564. doi:10.1007/bf026403658576772
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuglenes D, Oian P, Kristiansen IS. Obstetricians’ choice of cesarean delivery in ambiguous cases: is it influenced by risk attitude or fear of complaints and litigation? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;200(1):48.e1–8. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2008.07.021
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs R, Smith P, Goddard M. Measuring performance: an examination of composite performance indicators. University of York, Center for Health Economcs, CHE Technical Paper Series 29; 2004 Available from: https://www.york.ac.uk/che/pdf/tp29.pdf. Accessed 724, 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Nardo M, Saisana M, Saltelli A, Tarantola S Tools for composite indicators building. institute for the protection and security of the citizen econometrics and statistical support to antifraud unit I-21020 Ispra (VA) Italy; 2005 Available from: http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC31473/EUR%2021682%20EN.pdf. Accessed 724, 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Smith P. Developing composite indicators for assessing health system efficiency In: Smith PC, editor. Measuring Up: Improving the Performance of Health Systems in OECD Countries. Paris: OECD; 2002:6–10.
   Google Scholar
• McIntire SA, Miller LA. Foundations of Psychological Testing. 2nd ed. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons; 2005.
   Google Scholar
• Dodd JM, Crowther CA, Huertas E, Guise JM, Horey D. Planned elective repeat caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for women with a previous caesarean birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;12: Art. No.: CD004224. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004224.pub3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar