Top

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Anxiety | Research

Reproducing fear: the effect of birth stories on nulligravid women’s birth preferences

Authors: Yvette D. Miller, Marion Danoy-Monet

Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth | Issue 1/2021

Abstract

Objective

Preference for caesarean birth is associated with higher fear and lower self-efficacy for vaginal birth. Vicarious experience is a strong factor influencing self-efficacy in nulligravid women, and is increasingly accessible via digital and general media. This study assessed the effect of exposure to different birth stories on nulligravid women’s childbirth preferences and the factors mediating these effects.

Methods

Nulligravid women (N = 426) were randomly allocated to one of four conditions exposing them to written birth stories. Stories varied by type of birth (vaginal/caesarean) and storyteller evaluation (positive/negative) in a 2 × 2 design. Childbirth preference, fear of labour and vaginal birth, and self-efficacy for vaginal birth were measured before and after exposure via a two-way between groups analysis of covariance. Hierarchical regression models were used to determine the mediating effects of change in childbirth fear and childbirth self-efficacy.

Results

Variations in type of birth and storyteller evaluation significantly influenced childbirth preferences (F (1, 421) = 44.78, p < 0.001). The effect of vaginal birth stories on preference was significantly mediated by fear of labour and vaginal birth and self-efficacy. Effects of exposure to caesarean birth stories were not explained by changes in fear or self-efficacy.

Conclusions

Childbirth preferences in nulligravid women can be significantly influenced by vicarious experiences. For stories about vaginal birth, the influence of birth stories on women’s fear and self-efficacy expectancy are partly responsible for this influence. The findings highlight the importance of monitoring bias in vicarious experiences, and may inform novel strategies to promote healthy childbirth.

Available only for authorised users

Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Osterman MJK, Driscoll AK. Births: final data for 2018. Natl Vital Stat Reports. 2019;68(13):1980–2018.

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. National core maternity indicators 2017: summary report. Cat. no. PER 104. Canberra: AIHW; 2019.

World Health Organization. Caesarean sections should only be performed when medically necessary: WHO; 2015. Available from: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2015/caesarean-sections/en/

Belizán JM, Althabe F, Cafferata ML. Health consequences of the increasing caesarean section rates. Epidemiology. 2007;18(4):485–6. Available from: https://journals.lww.com/epidem/Fulltext/2007/07000/Health_Consequences_of_the_Increasing_Caesarean.14.aspx. https://doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0b013e318068646a.CrossRefPubMed

Robson SJ, de Costa C, Woods C, Ding P, Rane A. Maternal-choice caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth in low-risk primigravid women. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;58(4):469–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.12766.CrossRefPubMed

Rondung E, Thomtén J, Sundin Ö. Psychological perspectives on fear of childbirth. J Anxiety Disord. 2016;44:80–91. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0887618516303206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2016.10.007.CrossRefPubMed

Shaw D, Guise JM, Shah N, Gemzell-Danielsson K, Joseph KS, Levy B, et al. Drivers of maternity care in high-income countries: can health systems support woman-centred care? Lancet. 2016;388(10057):2282–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31527-6.CrossRefPubMed

Einarsdóttir K, Haggar F, Pereira G, Leonard H, de Klerk N, Stanley FJ, et al. Role of public and private funding in the rising caesarean section rate: a cohort study. BMJ Open. 2013;3(5):e002789 Available from: http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/3/5/e002789.abstract.CrossRef

Swift EMM, Gottfreðsdóttir HP, Zoega HP, Gross M, Stoll KP. Opting for natural birth: a survey of birth intentions among young Icelandic women. BMJ Sex Reprod Health. 2016;11:41–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.srhc.2016.09.006.CrossRef

10.

Fenwick J, Staff L, Gamble J, Creedy DK, Bayes S. Why do women request caesarean section in a normal, healthy first pregnancy? Midwifery. 2010;26(4):394–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2008.10.011.CrossRefPubMed

11.

D'Cruz L, Lee C. Childbirth expectations: an Australian study of young childless women. J Reprod Infant Psychol. 2014;32(2):199–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/02646838.2013.875134.CrossRef

12.

Hauck YL, Stoll KH, Hall WA, Downie J. Association between childbirth attitudes and fear on birth preferences of a future generation of Australian parents. Women Birth. 2016;29(6):511–7. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1871519216300233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2016.05.001.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Stoll K, Hall W, Janssen P, Carty E. Why are young Canadians afraid of birth? A survey study of childbirth fear and birth preferences among Canadian University students. Midwifery. 2014;30(2):220–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2013.07.017.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Stoll K, Hauck YL, Downe S, Payne D, Hall WA. Preference for cesarean section in young nulligravid women in eight OECD countries and implications for reproductive health education. Reprod Health. 2017;14(1):116. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-017-0354-x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Jolly N. Cutting through the discussion on caesarean delivery : birth practices as social practices practices as social practices. Heal Sociol Rev. 2018;27(1):31–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/14461242.2017.1411206.CrossRef

16.

Gottfredsdottir H, Magnúsdóttir H, Hálfdánsdóttir B. Home birth constructed as a safe choice in Iceland: a content analysis on Icelandic media. Sex Reprod Healthc. 2015;6(3):138–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.srhc.2015.05.004.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Lowe NK. Self-efficacy for labor and childbirth fears in nulliparous pregnant women. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2000;21(4):219–24. https://doi.org/10.3109/01674820009085591.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Stoll K, Hauck Y, Downe S, Edmonds J, Gross MM, Malott A, et al. Cross-cultural development and psychometric evaluation of a measure to assess fear of childbirth prior to pregnancy. Sex Reprod Healthc. 2016;8:49–54. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877575616000227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.srhc.2016.02.004.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Carlsson IM, Ziegert K, Nissen E. The relationship between childbirth self-efficacy and aspects of well-being, birth interventions and birth outcomes. Midwifery. 2015;31(10):1000–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2015.05.005.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Schwartz L, Toohill J, Creedy DK, Baird K, Gamble J, Fenwick J. Factors associated with childbirth self-efficacy in Australian childbearing women. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015;15(1):29. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4333169/. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-015-0465-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev. 1977;84(2):191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Bandura A. Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. Am Psychol. 1982;37(2):122–47. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.37.2.122.CrossRef

23.

Kay L, Downe S, Thomson G, Finlayson K. Engaging with birth stories in pregnancy: a hermeneutic phenomenological study of womens experiences across two generations. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017;17(1):283. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1476-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Amyx M, Gibbons L, Xiong X, Mazzoni A, Althabe F, Buekens P, et al. Sources of influence on pregnant women’s preferred mode of delivery in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Birth. 2018;45(1):71–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/birt.12307.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Regan M, McElroy KG, Moore K. Choice? Factors that influence women's decision making for childbirth. J Perinat Educ. 2013;22(3):171–80. https://doi.org/10.1891/1058-1243.22.3.171.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Munro S, Kornelsen J, Hutton E. Decision making in patient-initiated elective cesarean delivery: the influence of birth stories. J Midwifery Women's Health. 2009;54(5):373–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmwh.2008.12.014.CrossRef

27.

Savage JS. Birth stories: a way of knowing in childbirth education. J Perinat Educ. 2001;10(2):3–7. https://doi.org/10.1624/105812401X88138.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang A-G, Buchner A. G*power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007;39(2):175–91. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Baron R, Kenny DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986;51(6):1173–82. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Hayes AF, Preacher KJ. Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable. Br J Math Stat Psychol. 2014;67(3):451–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/bmsp.12028.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Tabachnick BG. In: Fidell LS, editor. Using multivariate statistics. 6th ed. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited; 2013.

32.

Keppel G. In: Wickens TD, editor. Design and analysis : a researcher’s handbook. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall; 2004.

33.

Beebe KR, Lee KA, Carrieri-Kohlman V, Humphreys J. The effects of childbirth self-efficacy and anxiety during pregnancy on prehospitalization labor. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2007;36(5):410–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1552-6909.2007.00170.x.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Blomquist JL, Quiroz LH, Macmillan D, McCullough A, Handa VL. Mothersʼ satisfaction with planned vaginal and planned cesarean birth. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2011;66(9):531–2. https://doi.org/10.1097/OGX.0b013e31822edfa1.CrossRef

35.

Luce A, Cash M, Hundley V, Cheyne H, van Teijlingen E, Angell C. “Is it realistic?” The portrayal of pregnancy and childbirth in the media. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2016;16(1):40. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-016-0827-x.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Preis H, Gozlan M, Dan U, Benyamini Y. A quantitative investigation into women’s basic beliefs about birth and planned birth choices. Midwifery. 2018;63(March):46–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2018.05.002.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Garthus-Niegel S, Von Soest T, Knoph C, Simonsen T, Torgersen L, Eberhard-Gran M. The influence of women’s preferences and actual mode of delivery on post-traumatic stress symptoms following childbirth: a population-based, longitudinal study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014;14(191):191. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-14-191.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Reproducing fear: the effect of birth stories on nulligravid women’s birth preferences
Authors: Yvette D. Miller
Marion Danoy-Monet
Publication date: 01-12-2021
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keyword: Anxiety
Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2393
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-021-03944-w

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Springer Medicine

Reproducing fear: the effect of birth stories on nulligravid women’s birth preferences

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Postnatal care utilisation among women in rural Ghana: analysis of 2014 Ghana demographic and health survey

Prevalence and risk factors of postpartum depression in the Middle East: a systematic review and meta–analysis

Low-dose aspirin for primary prevention of adverse pregnancy outcomes in twin pregnancies: an observational cohort study based on propensity score matching

Pregnant women’s perspectives on integrating preventive oral health in prenatal care

Association of malaria and curable sexually transmitted infections with pregnancy outcomes in rural Burkina Faso

Dysfunctional labor and hemoperitoneum secondary to an incidentally discovered dysgerminoma: a case report