'My pain was stronger than my happiness': Experiences of caesarean births from Lebanon

Midwifery

Volumn 29, Issue 11, 2013, Pages 1251-1256

  Kabakian Khasholian, Tamar ^a  

^a AMERICAN UNIVERSITY OF BEIRUT   (Lebanon)

Author keywords

Caesarean birth; Caesarean on demand; Childbirth; Postpartum health

Indexed keywords

ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR; ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CAESAREAN ON DEMAND; CESAREAN SECTION; CHILDBIRTH; CHILDBIRTH EDUCATION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICE; HUMAN; LEBANON; METHODOLOGY; MIDWIFE; NOCICEPTION; PATIENT PREFERENCE; POSTPARTUM HEALTH; PREGNANCY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; SOCIOECONOMICS; STANDARD;

CAESAREAN BIRTH; CAESAREAN ON DEMAND; CHILDBIRTH; POSTPARTUM HEALTH;

ADAPTATION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; ADULT; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CESAREAN SECTION; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICES NEEDS AND DEMAND; HUMANS; LEBANON; MIDWIFERY; PAIN PERCEPTION; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PREGNANCY; PRENATAL EDUCATION; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS;

EID: 84884595826     PISSN: 02666138     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.midw.2012.09.001     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Abdulrahim, S., El Asmar, Kh. The use of self-rated health in social inequities in health research: evidence from 6 Arab countries. International Journal for Equity in Health, in press.
2. Alexander S., Bouvier-Colle M.H. Vaginal delivery vs. a 'nice clean cut': giving more attention to mothers' postpartum health. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology 2001, 15:241-242.
3. Armson B.A. Is planned caesarean childbirth a safe alternative?. Canadian Medical Association Journal 2007, 176:475-476.
4. Behague D.P., Victoria C.G., Barros F.C. 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. British Medical Journal 2002, 324:942-945.
5. Belizan J.M., Althabe F., Cafferata M.L. Health consequences of the increasing caesarean section rates. Epidemiology 2007, 18:485-486.
6. Bryman A. Social Research Methods 2008, Oxford University Press, New York.
7. Danso K.A., Schwandt H.M., Turpin C.A., Seffah J.D., Samba A., Hindin M.J. Preference of Ghanaian women for vaginal or caesarean delivery postpartum. Ghana Medical Journal 2009, 43:29-33.
8. DeJong J., Akik C., El Kak F., Osman H., El-Jardali F. The safety and quality of childbirth in the context of health systems: mapping maternal health provision in Lebanon. Midwifery 2010, 26:549-557.
9. Dursun P., Yanik F.B., Zeynelogly H.B., Baser E., Kuscu E., Ayhan A. Why women request cesarean section without medical indication?. Journal of Maternal Fetal Neonatal Medicine 2011, 24:1133-1137.
10. Edwards G.J., Davies N.J. Elective caesarean section-the patient's choice?. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2001, 21:128-129.
11. Gamble J.A., Creedy D.K. Women's request for a cesarean section: a critique of the literature. Birth 2000, 27:256-263.
12. Green J., Willis K., Hughes E., et al. Generating best evidence from qualitative research: the role of data analysis. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 2007, 31:545-550.
13. Handelzalts J.E., Fisher S., Lurie S., Shalev A., Golan A., Sadan O. Personality, fear of childbirth and cesarean delivery on demand. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 2012, 91:16-21.
14. Hewer N., Boschma G., Hall W.A. Elective caesarean section as a transformative technological process: players, power and context. Journal of Advanced Nursing 2009, 65:1762-1771.
15. Hopkins K. Are Brazilian women really choosing to deliver by cesarean?. Social Science and Medicine 2000, 51:725-740.
16. Johanson R., Newborn M., Macfarlane A. Has the medicalisation of childbirth gone too far?. British Medical Journal 2002, 324:892-895.
17. Kabakian-Khasholian T., Campbell O., Shediac-Rizkallah M., Ghorayeb F. Women's experiences of maternity care: satisfaction or passivity?. Social Science and Medicine 2000, 51:103-113.
18. Kabakian-Khasholian T., Kaddour A., DeJong J., Shayboub R., Nassar A. The enabling environment for high C-section rates: policy considerations. Health Policy 2007, 83:31-49.
19. Kealy M.A., Small R.E., Liamputtong P. Recovery after caesarean birth: a qualitative study of women's accounts in Victoria, Australia. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2010, 10:47.
20. Khayat R., Campbell O. Hospital practices in maternity wards in Lebanon. Health Policy and Planning 2000, 15:270-278.
21. Kingdon C., Neilson K., 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.
22. Koroukian S. Relative risk of postpartum complications in the Ohio Medicaid population: vaginal versus cesarean delivery. Medical Care Research and Review 2004, 6:203-224.
23. Kuklina E., Meikle S., Jamieson D., et al. Severe obstetric morbidity in the United States: 1985-2005. Obstetrics and Gynecology 2009, 113:292-299.
24. Lee A.S.M., Kirkham M. Disciplinary discourses: rates of caesarean section explained by medicine, midwifery and feminism. Health Care for Women International 2008, 29:448-467.
25. Lobel M., DeLuca R. Psychosocial sequelae of cesarean delivery: review and analysis of their causes and implications. Social Science and Medicine 2007, 64:2272-2284.
26. Lydon-Rochelle M., Holt V., Martin D., Easterling T. Association between method of delivery and maternal rehospitalization. Journal of American Medical Association 2000, 283:2411-2416.
27. Mazzoni A., Althabe F., Liu N.H., et al. Womens' preferences for caesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2011, 118:391-399.
28. McCourt C., Weaver J., Statham H., Beake S., Gamble J., Greedy D.K. Elective cesarean section and decision making: a critical review of the literature. Birth 2007, 34:65-79.
29. McFarlin B.L. Elective caesarean birth: issues and ethics of an informed decision. Journal of Midwifery and Women's Health 2004, 49:421-429.
30. Ministry of Public Health, 1996. Pan Arab Project For Child Development. Maternal and Child Health Survey, Lebanon.
31. 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.
32. Pang S.M., Leung T.Y., Lai C.Y., Lau T.K., Chung T.K. Determinants of preference for elective caesarean section in Hong Kong Chinese pregnant women. Hong Kong Medical Journal 2007, 13:100-105.
33. Pang M.W., Leung T.N., Lau T.K., Hang Chung T.K. Impact of first childbirth on changes in women's preferences for mode of delivery: follow-up of a longitudinal observational study. Birth 2008, 35:121-128.
34. Tamim H., El-Chemaly S., Nassar A., National Collaborative Perinatal Neonatal Network (NCPNN), et al. Incidence and correlates of cesarean section in a capital city of a middle-income country. Journal of Perinatal Medicine 2007, 35:282-288.
35. Tamim H., El-Chemaly S.Y., Nassar A.H., National Collaborative Perinatal Neonatal Network, et al. Cesarean delivery among nulliparous women in Beirut: assessing predictors in nine hospitals. Birth 2007, 34:14-20.
36. Tracy S., Tracy M.K. Costing the cascade: estimating the cost of increased obstetric intervention in childbirth using population data. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2003, 110:717-724.
37. Tschudin S., Alder J., Hendriksen S., et al. Previous birth experience and birth anxiety: predictors of caesarean section on demand?. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2009, 30:175-180.
38. UNICEF-Ministry of Public Health, 2000. National Perinatal Survey. UNICEF-Lebanon Country Office, Beirut.
39. Waldenstrom U., Hildingsson I., Ryding E.L. Antenatal fear and its association with subsequent caesarean section and experience of childbirth. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2006, 113:638-646.
40. Weaver J.J., Statham H., Richards M. Are there unnecessary cesarean sections? Perceptions of women and obstetricians about cesarean section for nonclinical indications. Birth 2007, 34:32-41.
41. World Health Organization, 1985. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet 2, 436-437.