Behind the myth - few women prefer caesarean section in the absence of medical or obstetrical factors

Midwifery

Volumn 27, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 620-627

  Karlström, Annika ^a,b   Nystedt, Astrid ^b   Johansson, Margareta ^b   Hildingsson, Ingegerd ^b,c  

^a Vasternorrland County Council   (Sweden)

^b MID SWEDEN UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^c KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Caesarean section; Maternal preference; Mixed method

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BIRTH; CESAREAN SECTION; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; DECISION MAKING; DELIVERY; ELECTIVE SURGERY; FEAR; FEMALE; HUMAN; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MOTHER; NURSE PATIENT RELATIONSHIP; NURSING METHODOLOGY RESEARCH; PARITY; PREGNANCY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; RISK; SOCIAL SUPPORT; STATISTICS; SWEDEN;

ADULT; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CESAREAN SECTION; COHORT STUDIES; CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; DECISION MAKING; DELIVERY, OBSTETRIC; FEAR; FEMALE; HUMANS; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MOTHERS; NURSE-PATIENT RELATIONS; NURSING METHODOLOGY RESEARCH; ODDS RATIO; PARITY; PARTURITION; PREGNANCY; SOCIAL SUPPORT; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, ELECTIVE; SWEDEN; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 80052664250     PISSN: 02666138     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.midw.2010.05.005     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Alves B., Sheikh A. Investigating the relationship between affluence and elective caesarean sections. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2005, 112:994-996.
2. Betran A.P., Merialdi M., Lauer J.A., et al. Rates of caesarean section: analysis of global, regional and national estimates. Paediatric Perinatal Epidemiology 2007, 21:98-113.
3. Bettes B.A., Coleman V.H., Zinberg S., et al. Cesarean delivery on maternal request: obstetrician-gynecologists' knowledge, perception, and practice patterns. Obstetrics and Gynecology 2007, 109:57-66.
4. Creswell J.W. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches 2009, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
5. Declercq E.R., Sakala C., Corry M.P., Applebaum S. Listening to mothers II: report of the second national U.S. survey of women's childbearing experiences: conducted January-February 2006 for childbirth connection by Harris interactive(R) in partnership with Lamaze international. Journal of Perinatal Education 2007, 16:15-17.
6. Fenwick, J., Staff, L., Gamble, J., Creedy, D.K., Bayes, S. 2008 Why do women request caesarean section in a normal, healthy first pregnancy?. Midwifery doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2008.10.011.
7. Fenwick J., Gamble J., Hauck Y. Reframing birth: a consequence of cesarean section. Journal of Advanced Nursing 2006, 56:121-130.
8. Gamble J.A., Creedy D.K. Women's request for a cesarean section: a critique of the literature. Birth 2000, 27:256-263.
9. Gamble J.A., Creedy D.K. Women's preference for a cesarean section: incidence and associated factors. Birth 2001, 28:101-110.
10. Gilliam M. Cesarean section on request: reproductive consequences. Seminars in Perinatology 2006, 5:257-260.
11. Habiba M., Kaminski M., Da Fra M., et al. Caesarean section on request: a comparison of obstetricians' attitudes in eight European countries. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2006, 113:647-656.
12. Hildingsson I., Rådestad I., Rubertsson C., Waldenström U. Few women wish to be delivered by caesarean section. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2002, 109:618-623.
13. Hildingsson I. How much influence do women in Sweden have on caesarean section? A follow-up study of women's preferences in early pregnancy. Midwifery 2008, 24:46-54.
14. Hildingsson I., Thomas J., Karlström A., Engström-Olofsson R., Nystedt A. Childbirth thoughts in mid-pregnancy: prevalence and associated factors in prospective parents. Sexual & Reproductive Healthcare 2010, 2:45-53.
15. Kingdon C., Neilson J., Singleton V., et al. Choice and birth method: mixed-method study of caesarean delivery for maternal request. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2009, 116:886-895.
16. Lavender T., Hofmeyr G.J., Neilson J.P., Kingdon C., Gyte G.M. Caesarean section for non-medical reasons at term. Cochrane Database System Review 2006, 3. CD004660.
17. Laws P., Abeywardana S., Walker J., Sullivan E. Australia's Mothers and Babies 2005 2007, AIHW National Perinatal Statistics Unit, Sydney.
18. Leeb K., Baibergenova A., Wen E., Webster G.M., Zelmer J. Are there socio-economic differences in caesarean section rates in Canada?. Healthcare Policy 2005, 1:48-54.
19. Liu S., Liston R.M., Joseph K., Heaman M., Sauve R., Kramer M.S. Maternal mortality and severe morbidity associated with low-risk planned cesarean delivery versus planned vaginal delivery at term. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2007, 176:455-460.
20. MacDorman M.F., Menacker F., Declercq E. Cesarean birth in the United States: epidemiology, trends, and outcomes. Clinics in Perinatology 2008, 35:293-307.
21. MacDorman M.F., Declercq E., Menacker F., Malloy M.H. Neonatal mortality for primary cesarean and vaginal births to low-risk women: application of an "Intention-to-treat" model. Birth 2008, 35:3-8.
22. McCourt C., Weaver J., Statham H., Beake S., Gamble J., Creedy D.K. Elective cesarean section and decision making: a critical review of the literature. Birth 2007, 34:65-79.
23. Minkoff H., Chervenak F.A. Elective primary cesarean delivery. New England Journal of Medicine 2003, 348:946-950.
24. NICE, 2004. NCC for Women's and Children's Health. Caesarean Section Clinical guideline 13. National Institute for Clinical Excellence.
25. Pakenham S., Chamberlain S.M., Smith G.N. Women's views on elective primary caesarean section. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada 2006, 28:1089-1094.
26. Polit D., Tatano Beck C. Nursing Research Generating an Assessing Evidence for Nursing Practice 2008, Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
27. Rothman K. Epidemiology: An Introduction 2002, Oxford University Press, New York.
28. Rouhe H., Salmela-Aro K., Halmesmäki E., Saisto T. Fear of childbirth according to parity, gestational age, and obstetric history. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2009, 116:67-73.
29. Saisto T., Halmesmäki E. Fear of childbirth: a neglected dilemma. Acta Obstetrica Gynecologica Scandinavica 2003, 82:201-208.
30. Statistiska centralbyrån (Statistics Sweden). 2010. Available from: http://www.scb.se/statistik.
31. Socialstyrelsen (The National Board of Health and Welfare). 2010. Available from: http://www.socialstyrelsen.se/Statistik/statistik_amne/graviditet/index.htm.
32. Thomas, J., Paranjothy, S., 2001. National Sentinel Caesarean Section Audit Report. In Clinical Effectiveness Support Unit (Eds.) Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, London.
33. Waldenström U., Hildingsson I., Ryding E.L. Antenatal fear of childbirth and its association with subsequent caesarean section and experience of childbirth. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2006, 113:638-646.
34. Walker R., Turnbull D., Wilkinson C. Increasing cesarean section rates: exploring the role of culture in an Australian community. Birth 2004, 31:117-124.
35. Wax J.R., Cartin A., Pinette M.G., Blackstone J. Patient choice cesarean: an evidence-based review. Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey 2004, 8:601-616.
36. Weaver J.J., Statham H., Richards M. Are there "unnecessary" cesarean sections? Perceptions of women and obstetricians about cesarean sections for nonclinical indications. Birth 2007, 34:32-41.
37. Wiklund I., Edman G., Larsson C., Andolf E. Personality and mode of delivery. Acta Obstetrica Gynecologica Scandinavica 2006, 85:1225-1230.