Attitudes of Obstetricians toward cesarean delivery in challenging cases

Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India

Volumn 63, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 301-305

  Samadi, Sareh ^a   Gholizadeh, Naeimeh ^a   Shoar, Nasrin ^b   Shoar, Saeed ^c  

^a MASHHAD UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

^b KASHAN UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

^c TEHRAN UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

Author keywords

Ambiguous cases; Cesarean delivery; Risk attitude

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREECH PRESENTATION; CESAREAN SECTION; CHILDBIRTH; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CONFIDENTIALITY; DELIVERY; FEMALE; FEMALE PHYSICIAN; HUMAN; LAW; LAW SUIT; MALE; MEDICOLEGAL ASPECT; OBSTETRICIAN; PERSONALITY TEST; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; PILOT STUDY; PREGNANT WOMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; VAGINAL DELIVERY;

EID: 84887892005     PISSN: 09719202     EISSN: 09756434     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s13224-013-0401-7     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. National Institutes of Health state-of-the-science conference statement. Cesarean delivery on maternal request. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107:1386-97.
2. Births: preliminary data for 2005. National Center for Health Statistics [database on the Internet]. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/pubs/pubd/hestats/ prelimbirths05/prelimbirths05.htm (2006). Accessed 23 March 2007.
3. Martin J, Hamilton B, Menacher F, et al. Preliminary births for 2004. In Statistics NCHS, editor. Infant and Maternal Health: Health E-stats. Atlanta: NCHS; 2005.
4. Menacker F. Trends in cesarean rates for first births and repeat cesarean rates for low-risk women: United States, 1990-2003; Contract No.: Document Number; 2005.
5. 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. 2009;200(1):48 e1-8.
6. Miesnik SR, Reale BJ. A review of issues surrounding medically elective cesarean delivery. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2007;36(6):605-15.
7. Amu O, Rajendran S, Bolaji I. Should doctors perform an elective caesarean section on request? Maternal choice alone should not determine method of delivery. BMJ. 1998;317:463-5.
8. Bewley S, Cockburn J. The unethics of 'request' caesarean section. BJOG. 2002;109:593-6.
9. Paterson-Brown S. Should doctors perform an elective caesarean section on request? Yes, as long as the woman is fully informed. BMJ. 1998;317:462-3.
10. Liu S, Liston R, Joseph K, et al. Maternal Health Study Group of the Canadian Perinatal Surveillance System. Maternal mortality and severe morbidity associated with low-risk planned cesarean delivery versus planned vaginal delivery at term. CMAJ. 2007;176:455-60.
11. Benedetti T, Baldwin L, Skillman S, et al. Professional liability issues and practice patterns of obstetric providers in Washington State. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107:1238-46.
12. Declercq E, Menacker F, Macdorman M. Maternal risk profiles and the primary cesarean rate in the United States, 1991-2002. Am J Public Health. 2006;96:867-72.
13. Ecker J, Frigoletto FJ. Cesarean delivery and the risk-benefit calculus. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:885-8.
14. Localio AR, Lawthers AG, Bengtson JM, et al. Relationship between malpractice claims and cesarean delivery. JAMA. 1993;269:366-73.
15. Mello M, Studdert D, Brennan T. The new medical malpractice crisis. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2281-4.
16. Murthy K, Grobman W, Lee T, et al. Association between rising professional liability insurance premiums and primary cesarean delivery rates. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;110:1264-9.
17. Rock S. Malpractice premiums and primary cesarean section rates in New York and Illinois. Public Health Rep. 1988;103:459-63.
18. Ryan K, Schnatz P, Greene J, et al. Change in cesarean section rate as a reflection of the present malpractice crisis. Conn Med. 2005;69:139-41.
19. Yang Y, Mello M, Subramanian S, et al. Relationship between malpractice litigation pressure and rates of cesarean section and vaginal birth after cesarean section. Med Care. 2009;47:234-42.
20. Jackson D. Inventor Sigma Assessment Systems Inc, assignee. Jackson personality inventory-revised manual. 2004.
21. Nerum H, Halvorsen L, Sorlie T, et al. Maternal request for cesarean section due to fear of birth: can it be changed through crisis-oriented counseling? Birth. 2006;33(3):221-8.
22. Zwecker P, Azoulay L, Abenhaim HA. Effect of fear of litigation on obstetric care: a nationwide analysis on obstetric practice. Am J Perinatol. 2011;28(4):277-84.
23. Habiba M, Kaminski M, Da Fre M, et al. Caesarean section on request: a comparison of obstetricians' attitudes in eight European countries. BJOG. 2006;113(6):647-56.
24. Al-Mufti R, McCarthy A, Fisk N. Survey of obstetricians' personal preference and discretionary practice. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1997;73:1-4.
25. MacDonald C, Pinion S, MacLeod U. Scottish female obstetricians' views on elective caesarean section and personal choice for delivery. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2002;22:586-9.
26. Chauhan S, Chauhan V, Cowan B, et al. Professional liability claims and central association of obstetricians and gynecologists members: myth versus reality. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:1820-6.
27. Chervenak J. Overview of professional liability. Clin Perinatol. 2007;34:227-32.
28. Ogburn T, Espey E, Autry A, et al. Why obstetrics/gynecology, and what if it were not an option? A survey of resident applicants. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197:538.