A survey of access to trial of labor in California hospitals in 2012
In 2010, the NIH and ACOG recommended increasing women's access to trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC). This study explored access to TOLAC in California, change in access since 2007 and 2010, and characteristics of TOLAC and non-TOLAC hospitals. Between November 2011 and June 2012, charge nu...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2013-04, Vol.13 (1), p.83-83, Article 83 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 83 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 83 |
container_title | BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth |
container_volume | 13 |
creator | Barger, Mary K Dunn, Jennifer Templeton Bearman, Sage DeLain, Megan Gates, Elena |
description | In 2010, the NIH and ACOG recommended increasing women's access to trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC). This study explored access to TOLAC in California, change in access since 2007 and 2010, and characteristics of TOLAC and non-TOLAC hospitals.
Between November 2011 and June 2012, charge nurses at all civilian California birth hospitals were surveyed about hospitals' TOLAC availability and requirements for providers. VBAC rates were obtained from the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD). Distance between hospitals was calculated using OSHPD geocoding.
All 243 birth hospitals that were contacted participated. In 2010, among the 56% TOLAC hospitals, the median VBAC rate among TOLAC hospitals was 10.8% (range 0-37.3%). The most cited reason for low VBAC rates was physician unwillingness to perform them, especially due to the requirement to be continually present during labor. TOLAC hospitals were more likely to be larger hospitals in urban communities with obstetrical residency training. However, there were six (11.3%) residency programs in non-TOLAC hospitals and 5 (13.5%) rural hospitals offering TOLAC. The majority of TOLAC hospitals had 24/7 anesthesia coverage and required the obstetrician to be continually present if a TOLAC patient was admitted; 17 (12.2%) allowed personnel to be 15-30 minutes away. TOLAC eligibility criteria included one prior cesarean (32.4%), spontaneous labor (52.5%), continuous fetal monitoring and intravenous access (99.3%), and epidural analgesia (19.4%). The mean distance from a non-TOLAC to a TOLAC hospital was 37 mi. with 25% of non-TOLAC hospitals more than 51 mi. from the closest TOLAC hospital. In 2012, 139 hospitals (57.2%) offered TOLAC, 16.6% fewer than in 2007. Since 2010, five hospitals started and four stopped offering TOLAC, a net gain of one hospital offering TOLAC with three more considering it. Only two hospitals cited change in ACOG guidelines as a reason for the change.
Despite the 2010 NIH and ACOG recommendations encouraging greater access to TOLAC, 44% of California hospitals do not allow TOLAC. Of the 56% allowing TOLAC, 10.8% report fewer than 3% VBAC births. Thus, national recommendations encouraging greater access to TOLAC had a minor effect in California. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1186/1471-2393-13-83 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3636061</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A534612149</galeid><sourcerecordid>A534612149</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b580t-5a8cf3bd6a7175d5db568a7a8e09b75252626ae90658918e1982819b5be891f33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFks9LHTEQx0Npqdb27K0s9OJlNZNsfl2E52urBaEXPYckm9XI7uaZ7Ar-92Z59qHSUnJI5juf-TIzBKFDwMcAkp9AI6AmVNEaaC3pO7S_U96_eO-hTznfYQxCMvwR7RHKGCis9tH3VZXn9OAfq9hVxjmfczXFakrB9IvUGxtTFcZqbfrQxTQGU93GvAmT6fOiEwzkM_rQldB_eb4P0PXPH1fri_ry9_mv9eqytkziqWZGuo7alhsBgrWstYxLI4z0WFnBCCOccOMV5kwqkB6UJBKUZdaXuKP0AJ1ufTezHXzr_Dgl0-tNCoNJjzqaoF9nxnCrb-KDppxyzKEYnG0NbIj_MHidcXHQyxb1skUNVMuli6PnLlK8n32e9BCy831vRh_nXHgKGIuGsv-jtOFMiAY3Bf32Br2LcxrLOhdKcK4UlYU63lI3pvc6jF0sbbpyWj8EF0ffhaKvWPEFAo0qBSfbApdizsl3u2EB6-UL_WW8ry-XvOP__Bn6BOgkvmA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1347669938</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A survey of access to trial of labor in California hospitals in 2012</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>Springer Nature OA Free Journals</source><creator>Barger, Mary K ; Dunn, Jennifer Templeton ; Bearman, Sage ; DeLain, Megan ; Gates, Elena</creator><creatorcontrib>Barger, Mary K ; Dunn, Jennifer Templeton ; Bearman, Sage ; DeLain, Megan ; Gates, Elena</creatorcontrib><description>In 2010, the NIH and ACOG recommended increasing women's access to trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC). This study explored access to TOLAC in California, change in access since 2007 and 2010, and characteristics of TOLAC and non-TOLAC hospitals.
Between November 2011 and June 2012, charge nurses at all civilian California birth hospitals were surveyed about hospitals' TOLAC availability and requirements for providers. VBAC rates were obtained from the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD). Distance between hospitals was calculated using OSHPD geocoding.
All 243 birth hospitals that were contacted participated. In 2010, among the 56% TOLAC hospitals, the median VBAC rate among TOLAC hospitals was 10.8% (range 0-37.3%). The most cited reason for low VBAC rates was physician unwillingness to perform them, especially due to the requirement to be continually present during labor. TOLAC hospitals were more likely to be larger hospitals in urban communities with obstetrical residency training. However, there were six (11.3%) residency programs in non-TOLAC hospitals and 5 (13.5%) rural hospitals offering TOLAC. The majority of TOLAC hospitals had 24/7 anesthesia coverage and required the obstetrician to be continually present if a TOLAC patient was admitted; 17 (12.2%) allowed personnel to be 15-30 minutes away. TOLAC eligibility criteria included one prior cesarean (32.4%), spontaneous labor (52.5%), continuous fetal monitoring and intravenous access (99.3%), and epidural analgesia (19.4%). The mean distance from a non-TOLAC to a TOLAC hospital was 37 mi. with 25% of non-TOLAC hospitals more than 51 mi. from the closest TOLAC hospital. In 2012, 139 hospitals (57.2%) offered TOLAC, 16.6% fewer than in 2007. Since 2010, five hospitals started and four stopped offering TOLAC, a net gain of one hospital offering TOLAC with three more considering it. Only two hospitals cited change in ACOG guidelines as a reason for the change.
Despite the 2010 NIH and ACOG recommendations encouraging greater access to TOLAC, 44% of California hospitals do not allow TOLAC. Of the 56% allowing TOLAC, 10.8% report fewer than 3% VBAC births. Thus, national recommendations encouraging greater access to TOLAC had a minor effect in California.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1471-2393</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1471-2393</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1186/1471-2393-13-83</identifier><identifier>PMID: 23551909</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: BioMed Central Ltd</publisher><subject>Births ; California ; Cesarean section ; Childbirth ; Childbirth & labor ; Emergency medical care ; Female ; Health aspects ; Health Care Surveys ; Health Services Accessibility - trends ; Hospitals - statistics & numerical data ; Humans ; Medical colleges ; Nurses ; Nursing ; Organizational Policy ; Patient Selection ; Patients ; Practice Guidelines as Topic ; Practice Patterns, Physicians ; Pregnancy ; Surveys ; Trial of Labor ; Vagina ; Vaginal Birth after Cesarean - statistics & numerical data ; Womens health ; Work</subject><ispartof>BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 2013-04, Vol.13 (1), p.83-83, Article 83</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2013 BioMed Central Ltd.</rights><rights>2013 Barger et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2013 Barger et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2013 Barger et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b580t-5a8cf3bd6a7175d5db568a7a8e09b75252626ae90658918e1982819b5be891f33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b580t-5a8cf3bd6a7175d5db568a7a8e09b75252626ae90658918e1982819b5be891f33</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3636061/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3636061/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,27901,27902,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23551909$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Barger, Mary K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dunn, Jennifer Templeton</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bearman, Sage</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DeLain, Megan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gates, Elena</creatorcontrib><title>A survey of access to trial of labor in California hospitals in 2012</title><title>BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth</title><addtitle>BMC Pregnancy Childbirth</addtitle><description>In 2010, the NIH and ACOG recommended increasing women's access to trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC). This study explored access to TOLAC in California, change in access since 2007 and 2010, and characteristics of TOLAC and non-TOLAC hospitals.
Between November 2011 and June 2012, charge nurses at all civilian California birth hospitals were surveyed about hospitals' TOLAC availability and requirements for providers. VBAC rates were obtained from the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD). Distance between hospitals was calculated using OSHPD geocoding.
All 243 birth hospitals that were contacted participated. In 2010, among the 56% TOLAC hospitals, the median VBAC rate among TOLAC hospitals was 10.8% (range 0-37.3%). The most cited reason for low VBAC rates was physician unwillingness to perform them, especially due to the requirement to be continually present during labor. TOLAC hospitals were more likely to be larger hospitals in urban communities with obstetrical residency training. However, there were six (11.3%) residency programs in non-TOLAC hospitals and 5 (13.5%) rural hospitals offering TOLAC. The majority of TOLAC hospitals had 24/7 anesthesia coverage and required the obstetrician to be continually present if a TOLAC patient was admitted; 17 (12.2%) allowed personnel to be 15-30 minutes away. TOLAC eligibility criteria included one prior cesarean (32.4%), spontaneous labor (52.5%), continuous fetal monitoring and intravenous access (99.3%), and epidural analgesia (19.4%). The mean distance from a non-TOLAC to a TOLAC hospital was 37 mi. with 25% of non-TOLAC hospitals more than 51 mi. from the closest TOLAC hospital. In 2012, 139 hospitals (57.2%) offered TOLAC, 16.6% fewer than in 2007. Since 2010, five hospitals started and four stopped offering TOLAC, a net gain of one hospital offering TOLAC with three more considering it. Only two hospitals cited change in ACOG guidelines as a reason for the change.
Despite the 2010 NIH and ACOG recommendations encouraging greater access to TOLAC, 44% of California hospitals do not allow TOLAC. Of the 56% allowing TOLAC, 10.8% report fewer than 3% VBAC births. Thus, national recommendations encouraging greater access to TOLAC had a minor effect in California.</description><subject>Births</subject><subject>California</subject><subject>Cesarean section</subject><subject>Childbirth</subject><subject>Childbirth & labor</subject><subject>Emergency medical care</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Health aspects</subject><subject>Health Care Surveys</subject><subject>Health Services Accessibility - trends</subject><subject>Hospitals - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Medical colleges</subject><subject>Nurses</subject><subject>Nursing</subject><subject>Organizational Policy</subject><subject>Patient Selection</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Practice Guidelines as Topic</subject><subject>Practice Patterns, Physicians</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><subject>Trial of Labor</subject><subject>Vagina</subject><subject>Vaginal Birth after Cesarean - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Womens health</subject><subject>Work</subject><issn>1471-2393</issn><issn>1471-2393</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqFks9LHTEQx0Npqdb27K0s9OJlNZNsfl2E52urBaEXPYckm9XI7uaZ7Ar-92Z59qHSUnJI5juf-TIzBKFDwMcAkp9AI6AmVNEaaC3pO7S_U96_eO-hTznfYQxCMvwR7RHKGCis9tH3VZXn9OAfq9hVxjmfczXFakrB9IvUGxtTFcZqbfrQxTQGU93GvAmT6fOiEwzkM_rQldB_eb4P0PXPH1fri_ry9_mv9eqytkziqWZGuo7alhsBgrWstYxLI4z0WFnBCCOccOMV5kwqkB6UJBKUZdaXuKP0AJ1ufTezHXzr_Dgl0-tNCoNJjzqaoF9nxnCrb-KDppxyzKEYnG0NbIj_MHidcXHQyxb1skUNVMuli6PnLlK8n32e9BCy831vRh_nXHgKGIuGsv-jtOFMiAY3Bf32Br2LcxrLOhdKcK4UlYU63lI3pvc6jF0sbbpyWj8EF0ffhaKvWPEFAo0qBSfbApdizsl3u2EB6-UL_WW8ry-XvOP__Bn6BOgkvmA</recordid><startdate>20130403</startdate><enddate>20130403</enddate><creator>Barger, Mary K</creator><creator>Dunn, Jennifer Templeton</creator><creator>Bearman, Sage</creator><creator>DeLain, Megan</creator><creator>Gates, Elena</creator><general>BioMed Central Ltd</general><general>BioMed Central</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IAO</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0R</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130403</creationdate><title>A survey of access to trial of labor in California hospitals in 2012</title><author>Barger, Mary K ; Dunn, Jennifer Templeton ; Bearman, Sage ; DeLain, Megan ; Gates, Elena</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b580t-5a8cf3bd6a7175d5db568a7a8e09b75252626ae90658918e1982819b5be891f33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Births</topic><topic>California</topic><topic>Cesarean section</topic><topic>Childbirth</topic><topic>Childbirth & labor</topic><topic>Emergency medical care</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Health aspects</topic><topic>Health Care Surveys</topic><topic>Health Services Accessibility - trends</topic><topic>Hospitals - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Medical colleges</topic><topic>Nurses</topic><topic>Nursing</topic><topic>Organizational Policy</topic><topic>Patient Selection</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Practice Guidelines as Topic</topic><topic>Practice Patterns, Physicians</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><topic>Trial of Labor</topic><topic>Vagina</topic><topic>Vaginal Birth after Cesarean - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Womens health</topic><topic>Work</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Barger, Mary K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dunn, Jennifer Templeton</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bearman, Sage</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DeLain, Megan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gates, Elena</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale Academic OneFile</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Barger, Mary K</au><au>Dunn, Jennifer Templeton</au><au>Bearman, Sage</au><au>DeLain, Megan</au><au>Gates, Elena</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A survey of access to trial of labor in California hospitals in 2012</atitle><jtitle>BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth</jtitle><addtitle>BMC Pregnancy Childbirth</addtitle><date>2013-04-03</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>13</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>83</spage><epage>83</epage><pages>83-83</pages><artnum>83</artnum><issn>1471-2393</issn><eissn>1471-2393</eissn><abstract>In 2010, the NIH and ACOG recommended increasing women's access to trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC). This study explored access to TOLAC in California, change in access since 2007 and 2010, and characteristics of TOLAC and non-TOLAC hospitals.
Between November 2011 and June 2012, charge nurses at all civilian California birth hospitals were surveyed about hospitals' TOLAC availability and requirements for providers. VBAC rates were obtained from the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD). Distance between hospitals was calculated using OSHPD geocoding.
All 243 birth hospitals that were contacted participated. In 2010, among the 56% TOLAC hospitals, the median VBAC rate among TOLAC hospitals was 10.8% (range 0-37.3%). The most cited reason for low VBAC rates was physician unwillingness to perform them, especially due to the requirement to be continually present during labor. TOLAC hospitals were more likely to be larger hospitals in urban communities with obstetrical residency training. However, there were six (11.3%) residency programs in non-TOLAC hospitals and 5 (13.5%) rural hospitals offering TOLAC. The majority of TOLAC hospitals had 24/7 anesthesia coverage and required the obstetrician to be continually present if a TOLAC patient was admitted; 17 (12.2%) allowed personnel to be 15-30 minutes away. TOLAC eligibility criteria included one prior cesarean (32.4%), spontaneous labor (52.5%), continuous fetal monitoring and intravenous access (99.3%), and epidural analgesia (19.4%). The mean distance from a non-TOLAC to a TOLAC hospital was 37 mi. with 25% of non-TOLAC hospitals more than 51 mi. from the closest TOLAC hospital. In 2012, 139 hospitals (57.2%) offered TOLAC, 16.6% fewer than in 2007. Since 2010, five hospitals started and four stopped offering TOLAC, a net gain of one hospital offering TOLAC with three more considering it. Only two hospitals cited change in ACOG guidelines as a reason for the change.
Despite the 2010 NIH and ACOG recommendations encouraging greater access to TOLAC, 44% of California hospitals do not allow TOLAC. Of the 56% allowing TOLAC, 10.8% report fewer than 3% VBAC births. Thus, national recommendations encouraging greater access to TOLAC had a minor effect in California.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>BioMed Central Ltd</pub><pmid>23551909</pmid><doi>10.1186/1471-2393-13-83</doi><tpages>1</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1471-2393 |
ispartof | BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 2013-04, Vol.13 (1), p.83-83, Article 83 |
issn | 1471-2393 1471-2393 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3636061 |
source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; SpringerLink Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; PubMed Central Open Access; Springer Nature OA Free Journals |
subjects | Births California Cesarean section Childbirth Childbirth & labor Emergency medical care Female Health aspects Health Care Surveys Health Services Accessibility - trends Hospitals - statistics & numerical data Humans Medical colleges Nurses Nursing Organizational Policy Patient Selection Patients Practice Guidelines as Topic Practice Patterns, Physicians Pregnancy Surveys Trial of Labor Vagina Vaginal Birth after Cesarean - statistics & numerical data Womens health Work |
title | A survey of access to trial of labor in California hospitals in 2012 |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T21%3A52%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20survey%20of%20access%20to%20trial%20of%20labor%20in%20California%20hospitals%20in%202012&rft.jtitle=BMC%20Pregnancy%20and%20Childbirth&rft.au=Barger,%20Mary%20K&rft.date=2013-04-03&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=83&rft.epage=83&rft.pages=83-83&rft.artnum=83&rft.issn=1471-2393&rft.eissn=1471-2393&rft_id=info:doi/10.1186/1471-2393-13-83&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA534612149%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1347669938&rft_id=info:pmid/23551909&rft_galeid=A534612149&rfr_iscdi=true |