Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Maternal and Child Health Journal 3/2012

01-04-2012

Cesarean Delivery on Maternal Request: A Western North Carolina Perspective

Authors: Stephanie T. Romero, Carol C. Coulson, Shelley L. Galvin

Published in: Maternal and Child Health Journal | Issue 3/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Cesarean delivery on maternal request (CDMR), a primary cesarean without medical indication for a singleton, term pregnancy, has been identified by physicians as one factor in the increasing rate of cesarean delivery despite nationwide efforts to the contrary. The purpose of this project was to better understand women’s preferences and motivations for their desired mode of delivery. A 62-item survey was administered to pregnant women asking for their delivery preference, their reasons, sources of information, feelings about this pregnancy, and opinions about delivery options. Responses were analyzed for candidates for CDMR or for repeat cesarean section, separately; the standard error of measure is ±4% (95% CI). 396 patients returned surveys (response rate = 63.2%). CDMR was desired by 34/316 (11%) candidates; repeat cesarean was desired by 32/70 (46%) patients. Significant correlates of CDMR included choosing during the first trimester (22% vs. 8.2%; RR = 2.72; P = 0.015), smoking during pregnancy (19.7% vs. 7.6%; RR = 2.60; P = 0.036), and being worried about the delivery (P = 0.004). Desire for CDMR increased as worries increased from unworried (4.4%) to somewhat (11.8%) to very worried (27.6%). Primary reasons included existing medical complications and preventing birth injury. The majority of patients believed CDMR should be an “informed choice”; other opinions varied by delivery preference. The majority of women preferred vaginal deliveries suggesting little contribution of CDMR to the increasing cesarean rate. Contrary to physicians’ beliefs, the women’s primary objective was their infants’ health rather than their own well-being.
Literature
2.
go back to reference International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO). (1999). Ethical guidelines on human reproduction and women’s health. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 64, 317–322. International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO). (1999). Ethical guidelines on human reproduction and women’s health. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics, 64, 317–322.
3.
go back to reference NIH State-of-the Science Conference Statement on Cesarean Delivery on Maternal Request (2006). NIH Conses Sci Statements. March 27–29, 23, 1–29. NIH State-of-the Science Conference Statement on Cesarean Delivery on Maternal Request (2006). NIH Conses Sci Statements. March 27–29, 23, 1–29.
4.
go back to reference Coleman, V. H., Lawrence, H., & Schulkin, J. (2009). Rising cesarean delivery rates: The impact of cesarean delivery on maternal request. Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey, 64(2), 115–119.PubMedCrossRef Coleman, V. H., Lawrence, H., & Schulkin, J. (2009). Rising cesarean delivery rates: The impact of cesarean delivery on maternal request. Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey, 64(2), 115–119.PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Meikle, S. F., Steiner, C. A., Zhang, J., & Lawrence, W. L. (2005). A national estimate of the elective primary cesarean delivery rate. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 105, 751–756.CrossRef Meikle, S. F., Steiner, C. A., Zhang, J., & Lawrence, W. L. (2005). A national estimate of the elective primary cesarean delivery rate. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 105, 751–756.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Gossman, G. L., Joesch, J. M., & Tanfer, K. (2006). Trends in maternal request cesarean delivery from 1991 to 2004. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 108(6), 1506–1516.PubMedCrossRef Gossman, G. L., Joesch, J. M., & Tanfer, K. (2006). Trends in maternal request cesarean delivery from 1991 to 2004. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 108(6), 1506–1516.PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Cesarean Delivery on Maternal Request. (2007). ACOG Committee Opinion No. 394. American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 110, 1501–1504. Cesarean Delivery on Maternal Request. (2007). ACOG Committee Opinion No. 394. American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 110, 1501–1504.
10.
go back to reference Minkoff, H., Powderly, K. R., Chervenak, F., & McCullough, L. B. (2004). Ethical dimensions of elective primary cesarean delivery. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 103, 387–392.PubMedCrossRef Minkoff, H., Powderly, K. R., Chervenak, F., & McCullough, L. B. (2004). Ethical dimensions of elective primary cesarean delivery. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 103, 387–392.PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Kalish, R. B., McCullough, L. B., & Chervenak, F. A. (2008). Patient choice cesarean delivery: Ethical issues. Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 20, 116–119.PubMedCrossRef Kalish, R. B., McCullough, L. B., & Chervenak, F. A. (2008). Patient choice cesarean delivery: Ethical issues. Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology, 20, 116–119.PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Bost, B. W. (2003). Cesarean delivery on demand: What will it cost? American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 188, 1418–1423.PubMedCrossRef Bost, B. W. (2003). Cesarean delivery on demand: What will it cost? American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 188, 1418–1423.PubMedCrossRef
13.
14.
go back to reference Al-Mufti, R., McCarthy, A., & Fisk, N. M. (1997). Survey of obstetricians’ personal preference and discretionary practice. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology, 73, 1–4.PubMedCrossRef Al-Mufti, R., McCarthy, A., & Fisk, N. M. (1997). Survey of obstetricians’ personal preference and discretionary practice. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology, 73, 1–4.PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Land, R., Parry, A., Rane, A., & Wilson, D. (2001). Personal preference of obstetricians towards child birth. The Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 41, 249–252.CrossRef Land, R., Parry, A., Rane, A., & Wilson, D. (2001). Personal preference of obstetricians towards child birth. The Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 41, 249–252.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Gonen, R., Tamir, A., & Degani, S. (2002). Obstetricians’ opinions regarding patient choice in cesarean delivery. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 99, 577–580.PubMedCrossRef Gonen, R., Tamir, A., & Degani, S. (2002). Obstetricians’ opinions regarding patient choice in cesarean delivery. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 99, 577–580.PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Berholt, T., Ostberg, B., Legarth, J., & Weber, T. (2004). Danish obstetricians’ personal preference and general attitude to elective cesarean section on maternal request: A nation-wide survey. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 83, 262–266. Berholt, T., Ostberg, B., Legarth, J., & Weber, T. (2004). Danish obstetricians’ personal preference and general attitude to elective cesarean section on maternal request: A nation-wide survey. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 83, 262–266.
19.
go back to reference Bettes, B. A., Coleman, V. H., Zinberg, S., Spong, C. Y., Portnoy, B., DeVoto, E., et al. (2007). Cesarean delivery on maternal request: Obstetrician-gynecologists’ knowledge, perception, and practice patterns. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 109(1), 57–66.PubMedCrossRef Bettes, B. A., Coleman, V. H., Zinberg, S., Spong, C. Y., Portnoy, B., DeVoto, E., et al. (2007). Cesarean delivery on maternal request: Obstetrician-gynecologists’ knowledge, perception, and practice patterns. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 109(1), 57–66.PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Wu, J. M., Hundley, A. F., & Visco, A. G. (2005). Elective primary cesarean delivery: Attitudes of urogynecologists and maternal-fetal medicine specialists. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 105(2), 301–306.CrossRef Wu, J. M., Hundley, A. F., & Visco, A. G. (2005). Elective primary cesarean delivery: Attitudes of urogynecologists and maternal-fetal medicine specialists. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 105(2), 301–306.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Cotzias, C. S., Paterson-Brown, S., & Fisk, N. M. (2001). Obstetricans say yes to maternal request for elective caesarean section: A survey of current opinion. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology, 97, 15–16.PubMedCrossRef Cotzias, C. S., Paterson-Brown, S., & Fisk, N. M. (2001). Obstetricans say yes to maternal request for elective caesarean section: A survey of current opinion. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology, 97, 15–16.PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Ghetti, C., Chan, B. K. S., & Guise, J. M. (2004). Physicians’ responses to patient-requested cesarean delivery. Birth, 31, 280–284.PubMedCrossRef Ghetti, C., Chan, B. K. S., & Guise, J. M. (2004). Physicians’ responses to patient-requested cesarean delivery. Birth, 31, 280–284.PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Wax, J. R., CArtin, A., Pinette, M. G., & Blackstone, J. (2005). Patient choice cesarean-the Maine experience. Birth, 32(3), 203–206.PubMedCrossRef Wax, J. R., CArtin, A., Pinette, M. G., & Blackstone, J. (2005). Patient choice cesarean-the Maine experience. Birth, 32(3), 203–206.PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Liu, T. C., Lin, H. C., Chen, C. S., & Lee, H. C. (2008). Obstetrician gender and the likelihood of performing a maternal request for a cesarean delivery. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, 136, 46–52.CrossRef Liu, T. C., Lin, H. C., Chen, C. S., & Lee, H. C. (2008). Obstetrician gender and the likelihood of performing a maternal request for a cesarean delivery. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, 136, 46–52.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference Karlstrom, A., Engstrom-Olofsson, R., Nystedt, A., Thomas, J., & Hildingsson, I. (2009). Swedish caregivers’ attitudes towards caesarean section on maternal request. Women and Birth, 22, 57–63.PubMedCrossRef Karlstrom, A., Engstrom-Olofsson, R., Nystedt, A., Thomas, J., & Hildingsson, I. (2009). Swedish caregivers’ attitudes towards caesarean section on maternal request. Women and Birth, 22, 57–63.PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Mancuso, A., DeVivo, A., Fanara, G., Albiero, A., Priolo, A. M., Giacobbe, A., et al. (2008). Cesarean section on request: Are there loc-regional factors influencing maternal choice? An Italian experience. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 28(4), 382–385.PubMedCrossRef Mancuso, A., DeVivo, A., Fanara, G., Albiero, A., Priolo, A. M., Giacobbe, A., et al. (2008). Cesarean section on request: Are there loc-regional factors influencing maternal choice? An Italian experience. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 28(4), 382–385.PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Gamble, J., & Creedy, D. (2000). Women’s preference for a cesarean section: Incidence and associated factors. Birth, 28(2), 101–110.CrossRef Gamble, J., & Creedy, D. (2000). Women’s preference for a cesarean section: Incidence and associated factors. Birth, 28(2), 101–110.CrossRef
29.
go back to reference Lavender, T., Hofmeyr, G. J., Neilson, J. P., Kingdon, C., Gyte, G. M. L. (2006). Caesarean section for non-medical reasons at term. Cochran Database of Systematic Reviews, 2006(3). Art No. CD004660. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD00460.pub2. Lavender, T., Hofmeyr, G. J., Neilson, J. P., Kingdon, C., Gyte, G. M. L. (2006). Caesarean section for non-medical reasons at term. Cochran Database of Systematic Reviews, 2006(3). Art No. CD004660. doi:10.​1002/​14651858.​CD00460.​pub2.
30.
go back to reference Gamble, J., Creedy, D. K., McCourt, C., Weaver, J., & Beake, S. (2007). A critique of the literature on women’s request for cesarean section. Birth, 34(4), 331–340.PubMedCrossRef Gamble, J., Creedy, D. K., McCourt, C., Weaver, J., & Beake, S. (2007). A critique of the literature on women’s request for cesarean section. Birth, 34(4), 331–340.PubMedCrossRef
31.
go back to reference Pinott, J. A., & Pinotti, M. (1994). The cesarean epidemic in South America. JSOGC, 6, 154–157. Pinott, J. A., & Pinotti, M. (1994). The cesarean epidemic in South America. JSOGC, 6, 154–157.
32.
go back to reference Hildingsson, I., Radestad, I., Rubertsson, C., & Waldenstrom, U. (2002). Few women wish to be delivered by cesarean section. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 109, 618–623.PubMedCrossRef Hildingsson, I., Radestad, I., Rubertsson, C., & Waldenstrom, U. (2002). Few women wish to be delivered by cesarean section. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 109, 618–623.PubMedCrossRef
33.
go back to reference Wiklund, I., Edman, G., Larsson, C., & Andolf, E. (2006). Personalty and mode of delivery. Acta Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 85, 1225–1230.CrossRef Wiklund, I., Edman, G., Larsson, C., & Andolf, E. (2006). Personalty and mode of delivery. Acta Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 85, 1225–1230.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Wiklund, I., Edman, G., & Andolf, E. (2007). Cesarean section on maternal request. Cesarean section on maternal request: Reasons for the request, self-estimated health, expectations, experience of birth and signs of depression among first-time mothers. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 86, 451–456.PubMedCrossRef Wiklund, I., Edman, G., & Andolf, E. (2007). Cesarean section on maternal request. Cesarean section on maternal request: Reasons for the request, self-estimated health, expectations, experience of birth and signs of depression among first-time mothers. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 86, 451–456.PubMedCrossRef
35.
go back to reference Weaver, J. J., Statham, H., & Richards, M. (2007). Are there “unnecessary cesarean sections? Perceptions of women and obstetricians about cesarean sections for nonclinical indications. Birth, 34(1), 32–41.PubMedCrossRef Weaver, J. J., Statham, H., & Richards, M. (2007). Are there “unnecessary cesarean sections? Perceptions of women and obstetricians about cesarean sections for nonclinical indications. Birth, 34(1), 32–41.PubMedCrossRef
36.
go back to reference Robson, S., Carey, A., Mishra, R., & Dear, K. (2008). Elective cesarean delivery at maternal request: A preliminary study of motivations influencing women’s decision-making. The Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 48, 415–420.CrossRef Robson, S., Carey, A., Mishra, R., & Dear, K. (2008). Elective cesarean delivery at maternal request: A preliminary study of motivations influencing women’s decision-making. The Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 48, 415–420.CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Kingdon, C., Neilson, J., Singleton, V., Gyte, G., Hart, A., Gabbay, M., et al. (2009). Choice and birth method: Mixed-method study of caesarean delivery for maternal request. BJOG, 116, 886–895.PubMedCrossRef Kingdon, C., Neilson, J., Singleton, V., Gyte, G., Hart, A., Gabbay, M., et al. (2009). Choice and birth method: Mixed-method study of caesarean delivery for maternal request. BJOG, 116, 886–895.PubMedCrossRef
38.
go back to reference Pevzner, L., Goffman, D., Comerford, M., & Dayal, A. K. (2008). Patients’ attitudes associated with cesarean delivery on maternal request in an urban population. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 198(5), e35–e37.PubMedCrossRef Pevzner, L., Goffman, D., Comerford, M., & Dayal, A. K. (2008). Patients’ attitudes associated with cesarean delivery on maternal request in an urban population. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 198(5), e35–e37.PubMedCrossRef
39.
go back to reference Kenton, K., Brincat, C., Mutone, M., & Brubaker, L. (2005). Repeat cesarean section and primary elective cesarean section: Recently trained obstetrician-gynecologist practice patterns and opinions. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 192, 1872–1876.PubMedCrossRef Kenton, K., Brincat, C., Mutone, M., & Brubaker, L. (2005). Repeat cesarean section and primary elective cesarean section: Recently trained obstetrician-gynecologist practice patterns and opinions. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 192, 1872–1876.PubMedCrossRef
40.
41.
go back to reference American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). (2010). Vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery. ACOG Practice Bulletin # 115. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 116(2), 450–463. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). (2010). Vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery. ACOG Practice Bulletin # 115. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 116(2), 450–463.
Metadata
Title
Cesarean Delivery on Maternal Request: A Western North Carolina Perspective
Authors
Stephanie T. Romero
Carol C. Coulson
Shelley L. Galvin
Publication date
01-04-2012
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Maternal and Child Health Journal / Issue 3/2012
Print ISSN: 1092-7875
Electronic ISSN: 1573-6628
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-011-0769-x

Other articles of this Issue 3/2012

Maternal and Child Health Journal 3/2012 Go to the issue