Literature DB >> 12445986

Changing attitudes toward mode of delivery and external cephalic version in breech presentations.

Y Yogev1, E Horowitz, A Ben-Haroush, R Chen, B Kaplan.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare the attitude of gravid women in breech presentation towards external cephalic version (ECV) and mode of delivery between 1995 and 2001.
METHODS: A questionnaire on ECV and mode of delivery was distributed to women in the third trimester of pregnancy with breech presentation, attending our departmental clinic for a routine check-up once in 1995 and again in 2001 in order to analyze changing attitudes.
RESULTS: One hundred fifty-four women completed the questionnaire in 1995 and 127 in 2001. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in age, gestational age, gravidity, parity, or level of education. In 1995, more than half the women (52.7%) had heard of ECV and 53.8% were willing to consider it, whereas in 2001, 73.2% had heard of it but only 23.9% were willing to consider it. In both groups, the women who were familiar with ECV were more likely to work outside of the home, have a higher level of educated than the women who were not. The women who were willing to try ECV were more likely not to work outside of the home, to consider their pregnancy low risk, and to opt for vaginal delivery (vs. cesarean section) if ECV did not succeed. The percentage of women who would choose planned cesarean section if the presentation remained breech was significantly higher in 2001 (97%) than in 1995 (64.7%).
CONCLUSIONS: Attitudes toward breech delivery have changed since 1995. More women are aware of the option of ECV but are less inclined to consider it. Planned cesarean section for breech presentation is the overwhelming choice of women in general, with a significant increase in 2001 compared with 1995.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12445986     DOI: 10.1016/s0020-7292(02)00274-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet        ISSN: 0020-7292            Impact factor:   3.561


  7 in total

1.  Implementation of the external cephalic version in breech delivery. Dutch national implementation study of external cephalic version.

Authors:  Floortje Vlemmix; Ageeth N Rosman; Margot A H Fleuren; Marlies E B Rijnders; Antje Beuckens; Monique C Haak; Bettina M C Akerboom; Joke M J Bais; Simone M I Kuppens; Dimitri N Papatsonis; Brent C Opmeer; Joris A M van der Post; Ben Willem J Mol; Marjolein Kok
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2010-05-10       Impact factor: 3.007

2.  Breech repositioning unresponsive to Webster technique: coexistence of oligohydramnios.

Authors:  Christopher B Roecker
Journal:  J Chiropr Med       Date:  2013-06

Review 3.  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

4.  Helping pregnant women make better decisions: a systematic review of the benefits of patient decision aids in obstetrics.

Authors:  Rebecca Say; Stephen Robson; Richard Thomson
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2011-12-21       Impact factor: 2.692

5.  Evaluation of a decision aid for women with breech presentation at term: a randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN14570598].

Authors:  N Nassar; C L Roberts; C H Raynes-Greenow; A Barratt; B Peat
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 6.531

6.  A qualitative interview study exploring pregnant women's and health professionals' attitudes to external cephalic version.

Authors:  Rebecca Say; Richard Thomson; Stephen Robson; Catherine Exley
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2013-01-16       Impact factor: 3.007

7.  A randomised controlled trial to assess the feasibility of utilising virtual reality to facilitate analgesia during external cephalic version.

Authors:  Vinayak Smith; Ritesh Rikain Warty; Ravi Kashyap; Peter Neil; Carol Adriaans; Amrish Nair; Sathya Krishnan; Fabricio Da Silva Costa; Beverley Vollenhoven; Euan M Wallace
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-02-21       Impact factor: 4.379

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.