J C Rivo1, M Amyx2,3, V Pingray3, R A Casale4, A E Fiorillo5, H B Krupitzki5, J D Malamud6, M Mendilaharzu7, M L Medina7, A B Del Pino6, L Ribola4, J A Schvartzman5, G M Tartalo7, M Trasmonte4, S Varela4, F Althabe3, J M Belizán3. 1. Duke University School of Medicine, Duke University, Duke University Medical Center Greenspace, Durham, NC, USA. 2. Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA. 3. Mother and Child Health Research Department, Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS-CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina. 4. Hospital Nacional A. Posadas, El Palomar, Buenos Aires Province, Argentina. 5. Centro de Educación Médica e Investigaciones Clínicas, 'Norberto Quirno' (CEMIC), Autonomous City, Buenos Aires, Argentina. 6. Sanatorio de la Mujer, Rosario, Santa Fe Province, Argentina. 7. Instituto de Maternidad y Ginecología Nuestra Señora de las Mercedes, San Miguel de Tucumán, Tucumán Province, Argentina.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe obstetrical providers' delivery preferences and attitudes towards caesarean section without medical indication, including on maternal request, and to examine the association between provider characteristics and preferences/attitudes. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Two public and two private hospitals in Argentina. POPULATION: Obstetrician-gynaecologists and midwives who provide prenatal care and/or labour/delivery services. METHODS: Providers in hospitals with at least 1000 births per year completed a self-administered, anonymous survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Provider delivery preference for low-risk women, perception of women's preferred delivery method, support for a woman's right to choose her delivery method and willingness to perform caesarean section on maternal request. RESULTS: 168 providers participated (89.8% coverage rate). Providers (93.2%) preferred a vaginal delivery for their patients in the absence of a medical indication for caesarean section. Whereas 74.4% of providers supported their patient's right to choose a delivery method in the absence of a medical indication for caesarean section and 66.7% would perform a caesarean section upon maternal request, only 30.4% would consider a non-medically indicated caesarean section for their own personal delivery or that of their partner. In multivariate adjusted analysis, providers in the private sector [odds ratio (OR) 4.70, 95% CI 1.19-18.62] and obstetrician-gynaecologists (OR 4.37, 95% CI 1.58-12.09) were more willing than either providers working in the public/both settings or midwives to perform a caesarean section on maternal request. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the ethical debate surrounding non-medically indicated caesarean sections, we observe very high levels of support, especially by providers in the private sector and obstetrician-gynaecologists, as aligned with the high caesarean section rates in Argentina. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Non-medically indicated c-section? 74% of sampled Argentine OB providers support women's right to choose.
OBJECTIVE: To describe obstetrical providers' delivery preferences and attitudes towards caesarean section without medical indication, including on maternal request, and to examine the association between provider characteristics and preferences/attitudes. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Two public and two private hospitals in Argentina. POPULATION: Obstetrician-gynaecologists and midwives who provide prenatal care and/or labour/delivery services. METHODS: Providers in hospitals with at least 1000 births per year completed a self-administered, anonymous survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Provider delivery preference for low-risk women, perception of women's preferred delivery method, support for a woman's right to choose her delivery method and willingness to perform caesarean section on maternal request. RESULTS: 168 providers participated (89.8% coverage rate). Providers (93.2%) preferred a vaginal delivery for their patients in the absence of a medical indication for caesarean section. Whereas 74.4% of providers supported their patient's right to choose a delivery method in the absence of a medical indication for caesarean section and 66.7% would perform a caesarean section upon maternal request, only 30.4% would consider a non-medically indicated caesarean section for their own personal delivery or that of their partner. In multivariate adjusted analysis, providers in the private sector [odds ratio (OR) 4.70, 95% CI 1.19-18.62] and obstetrician-gynaecologists (OR 4.37, 95% CI 1.58-12.09) were more willing than either providers working in the public/both settings or midwives to perform a caesarean section on maternal request. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the ethical debate surrounding non-medically indicated caesarean sections, we observe very high levels of support, especially by providers in the private sector and obstetrician-gynaecologists, as aligned with the high caesarean section rates in Argentina. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Non-medically indicated c-section? 74% of sampled Argentine OB providers support women's right to choose.
Authors: Paul A Harris; Robert Taylor; Robert Thielke; Jonathon Payne; Nathaniel Gonzalez; Jose G Conde Journal: J Biomed Inform Date: 2008-09-30 Impact factor: 6.317
Authors: Aluísio J D Barros; Iná S Santos; Alicia Matijasevich; Marlos Rodrigues Domingues; Mariângela Silveira; Fernando C Barros; Cesar G Victora Journal: Rev Saude Publica Date: 2011-06-10 Impact factor: 2.106
Authors: Barbara A Bettes; Victoria H Coleman; Stanley Zinberg; Catherine Y Spong; Barry Portnoy; Emily DeVoto; Jay Schulkin Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Joshua P Vogel; Ana Pilar Betrán; Nadia Vindevoghel; João Paulo Souza; Maria Regina Torloni; Jun Zhang; Özge Tunçalp; Rintaro Mori; Naho Morisaki; Eduardo Ortiz-Panozo; Bernardo Hernandez; Ricardo Pérez-Cuevas; Zahida Qureshi; A Metin Gülmezoglu; Marleen Temmerman Journal: Lancet Glob Health Date: 2015-04-09 Impact factor: 26.763
Authors: Ana Pilar Betrán; Jianfeng Ye; Anne-Beth Moller; Jun Zhang; A Metin Gülmezoglu; Maria Regina Torloni Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-02-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Yanfang Guo; Malia S Q Murphy; Erica Erwin; Romina Fakhraei; Daniel J Corsi; Ruth Rennicks White; Alysha L J Harvey; Laura M Gaudet; Mark C Walker; Shi Wu Wen; Darine El-Chaâr Journal: CMAJ Date: 2021-05-03 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Melissa M Amyx; Fernando Althabe; Julie Rivo; Verónica Pingray; Nicole Minckas; María Belizán; Luz Gibbons; Gerardo T Murga; Ángel E Fiorillo; Julio D Malamud; Roberto A Casale; Gabriela Cormick; José M Belizán Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2021-01-03