Literature DB >> 25519201

How do maternal views of delivery outcomes vary by demographics and preferred mode of delivery?

Teresa N Sparks1, Amanda Yeaton-Massey2, Jesus M Granados3, Stephanie J Handler4, Michelle Meyer3, Aaron B Caughey5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate how maternal views of delivery outcomes vary by demographic characteristics and preference toward mode of delivery (MOD). STUDY
DESIGN: Survey of 719 pregnant women in outpatient clinics at an academic institution during their third trimester. Women ranked outcomes such as vaginal delivery (VD), cesarean delivery (CD), urinary incontinence, perineal lacerations, and induction of labor (IOL) on a visual analog scale (VAS) in order of worst imaginable (0) to best possible (100) outcomes.
RESULTS: Women of all ages ranked VD as more desirable than CD. However, women ≥ 35 years of age had greater valuations of both MOD compared with women <35 years, with mean VAS scores of 88.4 versus 86.4 for VD (p < 0.001) and 61.5 versus 51.9 for CD (p < 0.001). Women with a college education or higher also rated both MOD as more desirable than women with less than a college education. Additionally, women who preferred VD rather than CD had greater valuations of perineal laceration (43.3 vs. 31.5, p = 0.001) and urinary incontinence (40.7 vs. 30.1, p = 0.002).
CONCLUSION: Significant differences exist in women's views toward MOD and peripartum outcomes, by demographics and preferred MOD. Understanding delivery preferences better enables clinicians to counsel women about labor and management options. Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25519201     DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1395480

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Perinatol        ISSN: 0735-1631            Impact factor:   1.862


  2 in total

Review 1.  How should costs and cost-effectiveness be considered in prenatal genetic testing?

Authors:  Teresa N Sparks; Aaron B Caughey
Journal:  Semin Perinatol       Date:  2018-07-26       Impact factor: 3.300

2.  Labor Induction versus Expectant Management in Low-Risk Nulliparous Women.

Authors:  William A Grobman; Madeline M Rice; Uma M Reddy; Alan T N Tita; Robert M Silver; Gail Mallett; Kim Hill; Elizabeth A Thom; Yasser Y El-Sayed; Annette Perez-Delboy; Dwight J Rouse; George R Saade; Kim A Boggess; Suneet P Chauhan; Jay D Iams; Edward K Chien; Brian M Casey; Ronald S Gibbs; Sindhu K Srinivas; Geeta K Swamy; Hyagriv N Simhan; George A Macones
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2018-08-09       Impact factor: 91.245

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.