Perceptions and attitudes of pregnant women towards caesarean section in urban Nigeria

Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica

Volumn 86, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 42-47

  Aziken, Michael ^a   Omo Aghoja, Lawrence ^a   Okonofua, Friday ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BENIN   (Nigeria)

^b UBTH ^*  (Nigeria)

Author keywords

Attitudes; Caesarean section; Nigerian women; Perception; Pregnancy

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CESAREAN SECTION; CONTROLLED STUDY; CULTURAL FACTOR; DELIVERY; DEMOGRAPHY; EDUCATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTAL DELIVERY; INTERVIEW; LABOR; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; NIGERIA; PERCEPTION; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; VAGINAL DELIVERY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; CESAREAN SECTION; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HOSPITALS, TEACHING; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS; MATERNAL HEALTH SERVICES; NIGERIA; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; PREGNANCY; PREGNANT WOMEN; PRENATAL CARE; QUESTIONNAIRES; URBAN HEALTH;

EID: 33845749536     PISSN: 00016349     EISSN: 16000412     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00016340600994950     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Cunningham FG, MacDonald PC, Gant NF, Leveno KJ, Gilstrap LC, Hankins GDV, et al. Caesarean delivery and caesarean hysterectomy. In: Cunningham, et al, editors. Williams Obstetrics, 20th edition. Stamford, CT: Appleton & Lange; 1997. p. 509-31.
2. Kerr-Wilson R. Caesarean section on demand. In: Current Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Harcourt Publishers Ltd. 2001:126-28.
3. Ryding EL. Investigation of 33 women who demanded a caesarean section for personal reasons. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1993;72(4):280.
4. Gomen R, Tamir A, Degani S. Obstetricians' opinions regarding patient choice in caesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2002;99(4):577-80.
5. Egwuatu VE, Ezeh IOU. Vaginal delivery in Nigeria Women after a previous section. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1990;32:1-6.
6. Johanson RB, El-Timini S, Rigby C, Young P, Jones P. Caesarean section by choice could fulfill the inverse care law. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2001;97(1):20-2.
7. Behague DP. Beyond the simple economics of cesarean section birthing: women's resistance to social inequality. Cult Med Psychiatry. 2002;26(4):473-507.
8. Be Hague DP, Victoria CG, Burros FC. Consumer demand for caesarean sections in Brazil: informed decision-making, patient choice or social inequality? A population based birth cohort study linking ethnographic and epidemiological methods. BMJ. 2002;324(7343):942-5.
9. Hildingsson I, Radestad I, Robertsson C, Waldenstrom U. Few women wish to be delivered by caesarean section. BJOG. 2002;109(6):618-23.
10. Okonofua F. Optimizing caesarean section rates in West Africa. Lancet. 2001;358(9290):1289.
11. Illobachie CC. Delivery after a previous caesarean section. A review of 836 cases. Trop J Obstet Gynaecol. 1981;7(1):9-10.
12. Hart G. Maternal attitudes in prepared and unprepared caesarean deliveries. JOGN Nurs. 1980;9(4):243-5.