Literature DB >> 15976987

The choice of elective cesarean delivery in obstetrics: a voluntary survey of Canadian health care professionals.

Scott A Farrell1, Thomas F Baskett, Karen D Farrell.   

Abstract

To survey Canadian health care professionals about their willingness to offer elective cesarean delivery and to evaluate how their knowledge of obstetric-related pelvic-floor injury influences their practice. A voluntary questionnaire was distributed to health care professionals attending the 58th Annual Meeting of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada in 2002. Appropriate statistical analysis was used. One hundred and sixty-two questionnaires were completed. One hundred respondents were female (62%). Twenty-three percent (37/162) of respondents approved elective cesarean delivery after informed request in nulliparous women without an obstetrical indication. Males were more likely than females to perform cesarean delivery in these circumstances (34% versus 16%; OR 2.7, CI 1.2, 6.0). When questioned about the impact of mode of delivery on bladder and bowel continence, the number of respondents who answered "usually" or "always has a detrimental effect" were: vaginal birth, 16%; forceps, 20%; and cesarean delivery "reduces bladder and bowel problems", 44%. Males were more likely to emphasize a protective effect of cesarean delivery (55% versus 38%; OR 1.9, CI 1.0, 4.0). Health care professionals would opt for cesarean delivery for themselves when forceps delivery was the alternative more often than they would offer cesarean delivery to their patients (OR 1.98, CI 1.1, 3.5). While a significant number of women's health care professionals are prepared to offer cesarean delivery to nulliparous women, informed choice seems to motivate the offer rather than a conviction that cesarean delivery will protect the pelvic floor.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15976987     DOI: 10.1007/s00192-005-1324-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct


  14 in total

1.  Cesarean section versus forceps-assisted vaginal birth: it's time to include pelvic injury in the risk-benefit equation.

Authors:  Scott A Farrell
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2002-02-05       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  CAESAREAN SECTION ON REQUEST.

Authors:  Olujimi Jibodu; Sabaratnam Arulkumaran
Journal:  J SOGC       Date:  2000-09

3.  Temporal and geographical variation in UK obstetricians' personal preference regarding mode of delivery.

Authors:  Katie M Groom; Sara Paterson-Brown; Nicholas M Fisk
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol       Date:  2002-01-10       Impact factor: 2.435

4.  Survey of obstetricians' personal preference and discretionary practice.

Authors:  R Al-Mufti; A McCarthy; N M Fisk
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 2.435

5.  Parturition and urinary incontinence in primiparas.

Authors:  S A Farrell; V M Allen; T F Baskett
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 7.661

6.  Does cesarean delivery prevent anal incontinence?

Authors:  Mira Lal; Christopher H Mann; Roger Callender; Simon Radley
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 7.661

7.  Maternal morbidity associated with cesarean delivery without labor compared with spontaneous onset of labor at term.

Authors:  V M Allen; C M O'Connell; R M Liston; T F Baskett
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 7.661

8.  Few women wish to be delivered by caesarean section.

Authors:  Ingegerd Hildingsson; Ingela Rådestad; Christine Rubertsson; Ulla Waldenström
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 6.531

9.  Anal-sphincter disruption during vaginal delivery.

Authors:  A H Sultan; M A Kamm; C N Hudson; J M Thomas; C I Bartram
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1993-12-23       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Prevalence of urinary incontinence and associated risk factors in a cohort of nuns.

Authors:  Gunhilde M Buchsbaum; Michelle Chin; Chris Glantz; David Guzick
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 7.661

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Is it the decision of women to choose a cesarean section as the mode of birth? A review of literature on the views of stakeholders.

Authors:  Alice Yuen Loke; Louise Davies; Yim-Wah Mak
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2019-08-09       Impact factor: 3.007

2.  The Ontario Mother and Infant Study (TOMIS) III: a multi-site cohort study of the impact of delivery method on health, service use, and costs of care in the first postpartum year.

Authors:  Wendy Sword; Susan Watt; Paul Krueger; Lehana Thabane; Christine Kurtz Landy; Dan Farine; Marilyn Swinton
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2009-04-28       Impact factor: 3.007

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.