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

Volumn 324, Issue 7343, 2002, Pages 942-

  Béhague, Dominique P ^a   Victora, Cesar G ^a   Barros, Fernando C ^b  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF PELOTAS   (Brazil)

^b Centro Latino Americano de Perinatologia   (Uruguay)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BIRTH; BRAZIL; CESAREAN SECTION; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONSUMER; EXPERIENCE; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE ACCESS; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

ADULT; ANTHROPOLOGY, CULTURAL; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BRAZIL; CESAREAN SECTION; COHORT STUDIES; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICES NEEDS AND DEMAND; HUMANS; LABOR, INDUCED; LOGISTIC MODELS; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS;

EID: 85007706648     PISSN: 09598138     EISSN: 14685833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.324.7343.942     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Belizan J, Althabe F, Barros F, Alezander S. Rates and implications of caesarean sections in Latin America: ecological study. BMJ 1999; 319: 1397–1402.
2. Barros F, Victora C, Morris S. Caesarean sections in Brazil. Lancet 1996; 347: 839.
3. World Health Organization. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet 1985; 2: 436–437.
4. Ash A, Okah D. What is the right number of caesarean sections? Lancet 1997; 349: 1557.
5. Al-Mufti R, McCarthy A, Fisk N. Obstetricians' personal choice and mode of delivery. Lancet 1996; 347: 544.
6. Geary M, Wilshin J, Persaud M, Hindmarch P, Rodeck C. Do doctors have an increased rate of caesarean section? Lancet 1998; 351: 1117.
7. Murray S, Pradenas F. Health sector reform and rise of caesarean birth in Chile. Lancet 1997; 349: 64.
8. Haines A. Health care in Brazil. BMJ 1993; 306: 503–506.
9. De Mello e Souza C. C-sections as ideal births: The cultural construction of beneficience and patients' rights in Brazil. Cambridge Q Healthcare Ethics 1994; 3: 358–366.
10. Lilford R, Van Coerverden deGroot H, Moore P, Gingham P. The relative risks of caesarean section (intrapartum and elective) and vaginal delivery: a detailed analysis to exclude the effects of medical disorders and other acute preexisting physiological disturbances. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990; 97: 883–892.
11. Hemminki E, Merilainen J. Long-term effects of cesarean sections: ectopic pregnancies and placental problems. Am J Obstet Gynaecol 1996; 174: 1569–1574.
12. Thurmond A, Harvey W, Smith S. Cesarean section scar as a cause of abnormal vaginal bleeding: diagnosis by sonohysterography. J Ultrasound Med 1999; 18: 13–16.
13. Editorial. What is the right number of caesarean sections? Lancet 1997; 349(March 22): 815.
14. Peterson-Brown S. Should doctors perform an elective caesarean section on request? BMJ 1998; 317: 462–463.
15. Barros F, Victora C, Vaughan J, Capellari M. Perinatal risk in third world cities. World Health Forum 1985; 6: 322–324.
16. Cosminsky S. Childbirth and change: a Guatemalan study. In: MacCormackCP, ed. Ethnography of fertility and birth. London: Academic Press, 1982:205-229.
17. MacCormack C, ed. Ethnography of fertility and birth. London: Academic Press, 1982.
18. Kaufert P, O'Neil J. Analysis of a dialogue on risks in childbirth: clinicians, epidemiologists, and Inuit women. In: LindenbaumML, ed. Knowledge, power and practice: the anthropology of medicine and everyday life. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993:32-54.
19. Victora C, Barros F, Vaughan J. Epidemiologia de la desigualdad [Epidemiology of inequality]. Washington DC: Pan-American Health Organization, 1992.
20. Davis-Floyd R. The technocratic body: American childbirth as cultural expression. Soc Sci Med 1993; 38: 1125–1140.
21. LoCicero A. Explaining excessive rate of cesareans and other childbirth interventions: contributions from contemporary theories of gender and psychosocial development. Soc Sci Med 1993; 37: 1261–1269.
22. McClain C. Patient decision making: the case of delivery method after a previous cesarean section. Cult Med Psychiatry 1987; 11: 495–508.
23. Sargent C, Stark N. Surgical birth: interpretations of cesarean delivery among private hospital patients and nursing staff. Soc Sci Med 1987; 25: 1269–1276.
24. Klaus M, Kennell J, Robertson S, Rosa R. Effects of social support during parturition on maternal and infant morbidity. BMJ 1986; 293: 585–587.
25. Chalmers I, Enkin M, Keirse M. Effective care in pregnancy and childbirth, vol 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989.
26. Bewley S. Obstetricians' views on caesarean section versus vaginal birth. Lancet 1996; 347: 1189.