Home Pregnant women's perception of cesarean section on demand
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Pregnant women's perception of cesarean section on demand

  • Sibil Tschudin , Judith Alder , Stephanie Hendriksen , Johannes Bitzer , Karoline Aebi Popp , Rosanna Zanetti , Irene Hösli , Wolfgang Holzgreve and Verena Geissbühler
Published/Copyright: February 6, 2009

Abstract

Aims: To assess pregnant women's awareness of and attitudes towards cesarean section (CS) on demand, as well as to identify specific target groups by focusing on differences dependant on the participants' background, parity and intended mode of delivery.

Methods: The study was conducted at two centers during three months. German-speaking pregnant women were invited to answer an anonymous, structured questionnaire. We compared urban vs. rural, nulliparous vs. parous and women opting for a CS vs. denying this wish, with regard to awareness and attitudes towards CS on demand.

Results: Ninety-two percent of the 201 participants were aware of the possibility to deliver by CS on demand. Their sources of information were mostly print media reports, television, or friends. Pain avoidance and missing the birth experience were the main reasons for and against CS on demand, respectively. For women opting for CS on demand, traumatically-experienced previous birth and the child's well-being were other important reasons for a CS.

Conclusions: Because negative birth experience appears to be decisive for pregnant women's attitude towards CS on demand and their perception of CS seems to be partly based on misconceptions, antenatal counseling should focus on these aspects.


Corresponding author: Sibil Tschudin, MD Division of Social Medicine and Psychosomatics Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology University of Basel Spitalstrasse 21 CH-4031 Basel Switzerland Tel.: +41 61 325 90 67 Fax: +41 61 325 90 35

Received: 2008-7-18
Revised: 2008-9-30
Accepted: 2008-10-7
Published Online: 2009-02-06
Published Online: 2009-02-06
Published in Print: 2009-05-01

©2009 by Walter de Gruyter Berlin New York

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Immunologic and infectious consequences of immediate versus delayed umbilical cord clamping in premature infants: A prospective, randomized, controlled study
  2. Opinion paper
  3. The Groningen Protocol: Is it necessary? Is it scientific? Is it ethical?
  4. Original articles – Obstetrics
  5. Maternal visfatin concentration in normal pregnancy
  6. Visfatin in human pregnancy: maternal gestational diabetes vis-à-vis neonatal birthweight
  7. Values of amniotic fluid index in cases of preterm premature rupture of membranes
  8. Access to level III perinatal care for pregnancies of very short duration (<32 weeks)
  9. Statistical model predicting a short duration to birth in women with preterm labor at 22–35 weeks' gestation: the importance of large vaginal Gram-positive rods
  10. Pregnant women's perception of cesarean section on demand
  11. Adiponectin induced placental cell apoptosis could be mediated via the ADIPOR1-receptor in pre-eclampsia with IUGR
  12. The effect of bilateral pelvic neurectomy on cervical ripening in pregnant rats
  13. Original article – Fetus
  14. Evaluation of normal neurological development of human fetuses from 21 to 30 weeks' gestation through fetal auditory evoked response
  15. Do fetal heart rate deceleration patterns during labor differ between various umbilical cord abnormalities?
  16. Original articles – Newborn
  17. Immunologic and infectious consequences of immediate versus delayed umbilical cord clamping in premature infants: A prospective, randomized, controlled study
  18. The source of Helicobacter pylori infection in the neonatal period
  19. Neonatal phrenic nerve injury due to traumatic delivery
  20. Developmental alterations of the prefrontal cerebral cortex in sudden unexplained perinatal and infant deaths
  21. Letter to the editor
  22. Palivizumab for prophylaxis of RSV infection: five epidemic seasons' experience on adverse effects (2002–2007)
  23. Prevention of intrauterine growth restriction: Are there no effective methods available?
  24. Congress Calender
  25. 10.1515/JPM.2009.073
Downloaded on 22.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/JPM.2009.042/html
Scroll to top button