Erratum: Clinicians' views of factors influencing decision-making for caesarean section: A systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies (PLoS ONE (2018) 13:7 (e0200941) DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0200941);Clinicians’ views of factors influencing decision-making for caesarean section: A systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies

PLoS ONE

Volumn 13, Issue 7, 2018, Pages

  Panda, Sunita ^a   Begley, Cecily ^a,b   Daly, Deirdre ^a  

^a TRINITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CESAREAN SECTION; CHECKLIST; CINAHL; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; INFANT; INFANT CARE; INSURANCE; INTERVENTION STUDY; LAW SUIT; MEDLINE; MIDWIFE; OBSTETRICIAN; PHILOSOPHY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PSYCINFO; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; SKILL; SYNTHESIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; WEB OF SCIENCE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; META ANALYSIS; OBSTETRICS; PSYCHOLOGY; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA;

CESAREAN SECTION; DECISION MAKING; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HEALTH PERSONNEL; HUMANS; MIDWIFERY; OBSTETRICS;

EID: 85052203616     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202688     Document Type: Erratum

References (55)

1. Betran AP, Ye J, Moller AB, Zhang J, Gülmezoglu AM, Torloni MR. The Increasing Trend in Caesarean Section Rates: Global, Regional and National Estimates: 1990–2014. PLoS ONE 2016; 11.
2. Zhao Y, Zhang J, Zamora J, Vogel JP, Souza JP, Jayaratne K, et al. Increases in Caesarean Delivery Rates and Change of Perinatal Outcomes in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Hospital-Level Analysis of Two WHO Surveys. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology 2017; 31:251–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppe.12363 PMID: 28474743
3. Gibbons L, Belizán JM, Lauer JA, Betrán AP, Merialdi M, Althabe F. The Global Numbers and Costs of Additionally Needed and Unnecessary Caesarean Sections Performed per Year: Overuse as a Barrier to Universal Coverage. World Health Report 2010
4. Renes L, Barka N, Gyurkovits Z, Paulik E, Nemeth G, Orvos H. Predictors of caesarean section—a cross-sectional study in Hungary. The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine: the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstet 2017:1–5.
5. Burke N, Burke G, Breathnach F, McAuliffe F, Morrison JJ, Turner M, et al. Prediction of caesarean delivery in the term nulliparous woman: results from the prospective, multicenter Genesis study. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 2017; 216:598.e1–98.e11.
6. Kawakita T, Reddy UM, Landy HJ, Iqbal SN, Huang CC, Grantz KL. Indications for primary caesarean delivery relative to body mass index. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology 2016; 215:515.e1–9.
7. Brick A and Layte R. Exploring trends in the rate of Caesarean section in Ireland The Economic and Social Review 2011; 42:383–406.
8. Mylonas I, Friese K. Indications for and Risks of Elective Caesarean Section. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International 2015; 112:489–95. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2015.0489 PMID: 26249251
9. Mazzoni A, Althabe F, Liu NH, Bonotti AM, Gibbons L, Sanchez AJ, et al. Women’s preference for caesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. BJOG: an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology 2011; 118:391–9.
10. Mazzoni A, Althabe F, Gutierrez L, Gibbons L, Liu NH, Bonotti AM, et al. Women’s preferences and mode of delivery in public and private hospitals: a prospective cohort study. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2016; 16:34. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-016-0824-0 PMID: 26857448
11. Colomar M, Cafferata ML, Aleman A, Elorrio EG, Althabe F, Englebrecht S, et al. Mode of childbirth in low-risk pregnancies: Nicaraguan physicians’ viewpoints. Maternal and Child Health Journal 2014; 18:2382–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-014-1478-z PMID: 24740720
12. Kamal P, Dixon-Woods M, Kurinczuk JJ, Oppenheimer C, Squire P, Waugh J, et al. Factors influencing repeat caesarean section: qualitative exploratory study of obstetricians’ and midwives’ accounts. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2005; 112:1054–60.
13. Yazdizadeh B, Nedjat S, Mohammad K, Rashidian A, Changizi N, Majdzadeh R, et al. Caesarean section rate in Iran, multidimensional approaches for behavioral change of providers: a qualitative study. BMC Health Services Research 2011.
14. Bagheri A, Alavi NM, Abbaszadeh F. Iranian obstetricians’ views about the factors that influence pregnant women’s choice of delivery method: a qualitative study. Women and birth: Journal of the Australian College of Midwives 2013; 26:e45–9.
15. Arikan DC, Ozer A, Arikan I, Coskun A, Kiran H. Turkish obstetricians’ personal preference for mode of delivery and attitude toward caesarean delivery on maternal request. Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2011; 284:543–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-010-1682-z PMID: 20872227
16. Bettes BA, Coleman VH, Zinberg S, Spong CY, Portnoy B, DeVoto E, et al. Caesarean delivery on maternal request: obstetrician-gynecologists’ knowledge, perception, and practice patterns. Obstetrics and gynecology 2007; 109:57–66. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000249608.11864.b6 PMID: 17197588
17. Cox KJ. Providers’ perspectives on the vaginal birth after caesarean guidelines in Florida, United States: a qualitative study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2011; 11:72. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-11-72 PMID: 21992871
18. Bryant J, Porter M, Tracy SK, Sullivan SK. Caesarean birth: consumption, safety, order, and good mothering. Social Science and Medicine 2007; 65:1192–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.05.025 PMID: 17590252
19. Litorp H, Mgaya A, Mbekenga CK, Kidanto HL, Johnsdotter S, Essen B. Fear, blame and transparency: obstetric caregivers’ rationales for high caesarean section rates in a low-resource setting. Social Science and Medicine 2015b; 143:232–40.
20. Edmonds JK and Jones EJ. Intrapartum nurses’ perceived influence on delivery mode decisions and outcomes. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 2013; 42(1):3–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1552-6909.2012.01422.x PMID: 23167551
21. Degani N and Sikich N. Caesarean Delivery Rate Review: An Evidence-Based Analysis. Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series 2015; 15(9):1–58. PMID: 26366243
22. Vogel JP, Betrán AP, Vindevoghel N, Souza JP, Torloni MR, Zhang J, et al. Use of the Robson classification to assess caesarean section trends in 21 countries: a secondary analysis of two WHO multicountry surveys. The Lancet Global Health 2015; 3(5):260–e270.
23. Turner MJ. The use of quality control performance charts to analyse caesarean delivery rates nationally. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2011; 113:175–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2011.01.012 PMID: 21481388
24. Marshall JL, Spiby H, McCormick F. Evaluating the’Focus on Normal Birth and Reducing Caesarean section Rates Rapid Improvement Programme’: A mixed method study in England. Midwifery 2015; 31 (2):332–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2014.10.005 PMID: 25467600
25. Lucas PJ, Arai L, Baird J, Law C, Roberts HM. Worked examples of alternative methods for the synthesis of qualitative and quantitative research in systematic reviews.: BMC Med Res Meth., 2007 (vol 7).
26. Thomas J, Sutcliffe K, Harden A, Oakley A, Oliver S, Rees R, et al. Children and Healthy Eating: A systematic review of barriers and facilitators. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London 2003.
27. Huang K, Tao F, Faragher B, Raven J, Tolhurst R, Tang S, et al. A mixed-method study of factors associated with differences in caesarean section rates at community level: the case of rural China. Midwifery 2013; 29:911–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2012.11.003 PMID: 23434022
28. Kabakian-Khasholian T, Kaddour A, Dejong J, Shayboub R, Nassar A. The policy environment encouraging C-section in Lebanon. Health Policy 2007; 83:37–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2006.11.006 PMID: 17178426
29. Appleton B, Targett C, Rasmussen M, Readman E, Sale F, Permezel M. Knowledge and attitudes about vaginal birth after Caesarean section in Australian hospitals. VBAC Study Group. Vaginal Birth After Caesarean. The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology 2000; 40:195–9.
30. Bailit JL, Schulkin J, Dawson N V. Risk-adjusted caesarean rates: what risk factors for caesarean delivery are important to practicing obstetricians? The Journal of reproductive medicine 2007; 52.
31. Bergholt T, Ostberg B, Legarth J, Weber T. Danish obstetricians’ personal preference and general attitude to elective caesarean section on maternal request: a nation-wide postal survey. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2004; 83:262–6. PMID: 14995922
32. Chaillet N, Dube E, Dugas M, Francoeur D, Dube J, Gagnon S, et al. Identifying barriers and facilitators towards implementing guidelines to reduce caesarean section rates in Quebec. Bulletin of the World Health Organisation 2007; 85:791–7.
33. Chalmers BE, Mcintyre JA, Meyer D. South African obstetricians’ views on caesarean section. South African medical journal = Suid-Afrikaanse tydskrif vir geneeskunde 1992; 82:161–3. PMID: 1519135
34. Chigbu CO, Ezenyeaku CC, Ezenkwele EP. Obstetricians’ attitudes to caesarean delivery on maternal request in Nigeria. Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology: the journal of the Institute of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2010; 30:813–7.
35. Coleman VH, Erickson K, Schulkin J, Zinberg S, Sachs BP. Vaginal birth after caesarean delivery: practice patterns of obstetrician-gynecologists. Journal of Reproductive Medicine 2005; 50:261–66. PMID: 15916210
36. Coleman-Cowger VH, Erickson K, Spong CY, Portnoy B, Croswell J, Schulkin J. Current practice of caesarean delivery on maternal request following the 2006 state-of-the-science conference. The Journal of reproductive medicine 2010; 55.
37. Cotzias CS, Paterson-Brown S, Fisk NM. Obstetricians say yes to maternal request for elective caesarean section: a survey of current opinion. European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology 2001; 97:15–6. PMID: 11435000
38. Danishevski K, Mckee M, Sassi F, Maltcev V. The decision to perform caesarean section in Russia. International Journal for Quality in Health Care 2008; 20:88–94. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm070PMID: 18158293
39. Doret M, Touzet S, Bourdy S, Goucherand P. Vaginal birth after two previous c-sections: obstetricians-gynaecologists opinions and practice patterns. Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine 2010; 23:1487–92. https://doi.org/10.3109/14767051003678176 PMID: 20233132
40. Faas-Fehervary P, Schwarz K, Bauer L, Melchert F. Caesarean section on demand: influence of personal birth experience and working environment on attitude of German gynaecologists. European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology 2005; 122:162–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2005.01.016 PMID: 16219516
41. Foureur M, Turkmani S, Clack DC, et al. Caring for women wanting a vaginal birth after previous caesarean section: A qualitative study of the experiences of midwives and obstetricians. Women and Birth 2016; 30(1):3–8 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2016.05.011 PMID: 27318563
42. Fuglenes D, Oian P, Kristiansen IS. Obstetricians’ choice of caesarean delivery in ambiguous cases: is it influenced by risk attitude or fear of complaints and litigation? American journal of obstetrics and gynecology 2009; 200:48.e1–8.
43. Josefsson A, Gunnervik C, Sydsjö A, Sydsjö G. A comparison between Swedish midwives and obstetricians & gynecologists opinions on caesarean section. Maternal and Child Health Journal 2011; 15:555–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-010-0630-7 PMID: 20571901
44. Karlstrom A, Engstrom-Olofsson R, Nystedt A, Thomas J, Hildingsson I. Swedish caregivers’ attitudes towards caesarean section on maternal request. Women and birth: journal of the Australian College of Midwives 2009; 22:57–63.
45. Kenton K, Brincat C, Mutone M, Brubaker L. Repeat caesarean section and primary elective caesarean section: recently trained obstetrician-gynecologist practice paterns and opinions. American journal of obstetrics and gynecology 2005; 192:1872–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2005.01.046 PMID: 15970836
46. Koigi-Kamau R, Leting PK, Kiarie JN. Perceptions and practices of vaginal birth after Caesarean section among privately practicing obstetricians in Kenya. East African Medical Journal 2005; 82:631–36. PMID: 16619707
47. Kwee A, Cohlen BJ, Kanhai HH, Bruinse HW, Visser GH. Caesarean section on request: a survey in The Netherlands. European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology 2004; 113:186–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2003.09.017 PMID: 15063958
48. Litorp H, Mgaya A, Kidanto HL, Johnsdotter S, Essen B.’What about the mother?’ Womens and caregivers perspectives on caesarean birth in a low-resource setting with rising caesarean section rates. Midwifery 2015a; 31:713–20.
49. Monari F, Di Mario S, Facchinetti F, Basevi V. Obstetricians’ and midwives’ attitudes toward caesarean section. Birth: Issues in Perinatal Care 2008; 35:129–35.
50. Samadi S, Gholizadeh N, Shoar N, Shoar S. Attitudes of Obstetricians toward Caesarean Delivery in Challenging Cases. Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India 2013; 63:301–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-013-0401-7 PMID: 24431663
51. Weaver JJ, Statham H, Richards M. Are there’unnecessary’ caesarean sections? Perceptions of women and obstetricians about caesarean sections for nonclinical indications. Birth: Issues in Perinatal Care 2007; 34:32–41.
52. Aldakhil LO. Obstetric and gynecologic malpractice claims in Saudi Arabia: Incidence and cause. Journal of forensic and legal medicine 2016; 40:8–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jflm.2016.02.001 PMID: 26947435
53. Brick A, Layte R Nolan A, Turner M. Differences in nulliparous caesarean section rates across models of care: a decomposition analysis. BMC Health Services Research 2016; 16:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-015-1254-9
54. Schantz C, Sim KL, Petit V, Rany H, Goyet S. Factors associated with caesarean sections in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Reproductive health matters 2016; 24:111–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rhm.2016.11.009 PMID: 28024672
55. Lutomski JE, Murphy M., Devane D, Meaney S, Green RA. Private Health Care Coverage and Increased Risk of Obstetric Intervention. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2014; 14:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-14-1