Literature DB >> 11251511

Women's request for a cesarean section: a critique of the literature.

J A Gamble1, D K Creedy.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The consistently high cesarean section rate in most developed Western countries has been attributed in part to maternal request. This controversial view demands critical analysis. This paper provides a critique of published research relating to women's request for cesarean delivery.
METHOD: A search of the major databases was undertaken using the search term "cesarean section" with "maternal request," "decision-making," "patient-participation," "decision-making-patient," "patient-satisfaction," "patient-preference," and "maternal-choice." Ten research articles examining women's preferred mode of birth were retrieved, nine of which focused on women's preference for cesarean delivery.
RESULTS: The methodology of some studies may result in overreporting women's request for a cesarean delivery. The role of the woman's caregiver in the generation, collection, and entry of data, and the occurrence of post hoc rationalization, recall bias, and women's tendency to be less critical of their care immediately after birth are possible areas of concern. Due consideration is rarely given to the influence of obstetric risk for women who may be requesting a cesarean section or to the information women used in making their decision. Women's perceptions of their involvement in decision-making regarding cesarean section are used to draw conclusions regarding women's request.
CONCLUSIONS: Few women request a cesarean section in the absence of current or previous obstetric complications. The focus on women's request for cesarean section may divert attention away from physician-led influences on the continuing high cesarean section rates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11251511     DOI: 10.1046/j.1523-536x.2000.00256.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Birth        ISSN: 0730-7659            Impact factor:   3.689


  21 in total

1.  Non-pregnant patients' preference for delivery route.

Authors:  Andrea R Thurman; James S Zoller; Steven E Swift
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2004-05-14

Review 2.  Caesarean section for non-medical reasons at term.

Authors:  Tina Lavender; G Justus Hofmeyr; James P Neilson; Carol Kingdon; Gillian M L Gyte
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-03-14

Review 3.  Information for pregnant women about caesarean birth.

Authors:  D Horey; J Weaver; H Russell
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2004

Review 4.  External cephalic version for breech presentation at term.

Authors:  G Justus Hofmeyr; Regina Kulier; Helen M West
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-04-01

Review 5.  Women's preference for caesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

Authors:  A Mazzoni; F Althabe; N H Liu; A M Bonotti; L Gibbons; A J Sánchez; J M Belizán
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2010-12-07       Impact factor: 7.331

6.  Concurrent analysis of choice and control in childbirth.

Authors:  Austyn Snowden; Colin Martin; Julie Jomeen; Caroline Hollins Martin
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 3.007

7.  Prelabour caesarean section following IVF/ICSI in older-term nulliparous women: too precious to push?

Authors:  E Gillet; E Martens; G Martens; H Cammu
Journal:  J Pregnancy       Date:  2011-11-03

8.  Cost-effectiveness of external cephalic version for term breech presentation.

Authors:  Jonathan M Tan; Alex Macario; Brendan Carvalho; Maurice L Druzin; Yasser Y El-Sayed
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2010-01-21       Impact factor: 3.007

9.  Central neuraxial blockade-assisted external cephalic version in reducing caesarean section rate: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ibrahim Bolaji; Lillian Alabi-Isama
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Int       Date:  2009-12-23

Review 10.  External cephalic version for breech presentation before term.

Authors:  Eileen K Hutton; G Justus Hofmeyr; Therese Dowswell
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-07-29
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.