Top

The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India

Published in:

01-10-2013 | Original Article

Attitudes of Obstetricians toward Cesarean Delivery in Challenging Cases

Authors: Sareh Samadi, Naeimeh Gholizadeh, Nasrin Shoar, Saeed Shoar

Published in: The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India | Issue 5/2013

Abstract

Objective

To assess the behavior and preferred delivery method among Iranian obstetricians in challenging cases.

Method

Using the revised Jackson personality inventory questionnaire, the attitudes of obstetricians toward cesarean delivery were assessed in challenging childbirth cases. The study was conducted at the Mashhad University of Medical Sciences in Mashhad, Iran.

Result

Seventy-five obstetricians answered each item reflecting varying levels of preference and risk attitudes. However, a significant number of respondents avoided the risk of requesting a cesarean because of legislation and legal issues.

Conclusion

Iranian obstetricians prefer low-risk behavior for managing ambiguous delivery cases. Fear of legislation and medicolegal issues appear to be of great importance in this cohort primarily comprising female physicians.

Available only for authorised users

Likert scale is a scoring system devoting a number to each degree of measurement. A number’s interval is considered equal. The largest number corresponds to the severest condition compared with the smallest number which corresponds to the least severe status. This specifies the level of agreement that each respondent deems for each questionnaire item.

National Institutes of Health state-of-the-science conference statement. Cesarean delivery on maternal request. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107:1386–97.

Births: preliminary data for 2005. National Center for Health Statistics [database on the Internet]. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/pubs/pubd/hestats/prelimbirths05/prelimbirths05.htm (2006). Accessed 23 March 2007.

Martin J, Hamilton B, Menacher F, et al. Preliminary births for 2004. In Statistics NCHS, editor. Infant and Maternal Health: Health E-stats. Atlanta: NCHS; 2005.

Menacker F. Trends in cesarean rates for first births and repeat cesarean rates for low-risk women: United States, 1990–2003; Contract No.: Document Number; 2005.

Fuglenes D, Oian P, Kristiansen IS. Obstetricians’ choice of cesarean delivery in ambiguous cases: is it influenced by risk attitude or fear of complaints and litigation? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;200(1):48 e1–8.

Miesnik SR, Reale BJ. A review of issues surrounding medically elective cesarean delivery. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2007;36(6):605–15.PubMedCrossRef

Amu O, Rajendran S, Bolaji I. Should doctors perform an elective caesarean section on request? Maternal choice alone should not determine method of delivery. BMJ. 1998;317:463–5.PubMed

Bewley S, Cockburn J. The unethics of ‘request’ caesarean section. BJOG. 2002;109:593–6.PubMedCrossRef

Paterson-Brown S. Should doctors perform an elective caesarean section on request? Yes, as long as the woman is fully informed. BMJ. 1998;317:462–3.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Liu S, Liston R, Joseph K, et al. Maternal Health Study Group of the Canadian Perinatal Surveillance System. Maternal mortality and severe morbidity associated with low-risk planned cesarean delivery versus planned vaginal delivery at term. CMAJ. 2007;176:455–60.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Benedetti T, Baldwin L, Skillman S, et al. Professional liability issues and practice patterns of obstetric providers in Washington State. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107:1238–46.

12.

Declercq E, Menacker F, Macdorman M. Maternal risk profiles and the primary cesarean rate in the United States, 1991–2002. Am J Public Health. 2006;96:867–72.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Ecker J, Frigoletto FJ. Cesarean delivery and the risk-benefit calculus. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:885–8.PubMedCrossRef

14.

Localio AR, Lawthers AG, Bengtson JM, et al. Relationship between malpractice claims and cesarean delivery. JAMA. 1993;269:366–73.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Mello M, Studdert D, Brennan T. The new medical malpractice crisis. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2281–4.PubMedCrossRef

16.

Murthy K, Grobman W, Lee T, et al. Association between rising professional liability insurance premiums and primary cesarean delivery rates. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;110:1264–9.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Rock S. Malpractice premiums and primary cesarean section rates in New York and Illinois. Public Health Rep. 1988;103:459–63.PubMed

18.

Ryan K, Schnatz P, Greene J, et al. Change in cesarean section rate as a reflection of the present malpractice crisis. Conn Med. 2005;69:139–41.PubMed

19.

Yang Y, Mello M, Subramanian S, et al. Relationship between malpractice litigation pressure and rates of cesarean section and vaginal birth after cesarean section. Med Care. 2009;47:234–42.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Jackson D. Inventor Sigma Assessment Systems Inc, assignee. Jackson personality inventory-revised manual. 2004.

21.

Nerum H, Halvorsen L, Sorlie T, et al. Maternal request for cesarean section due to fear of birth: can it be changed through crisis-oriented counseling? Birth. 2006;33(3):221–8.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Zwecker P, Azoulay L, Abenhaim HA. Effect of fear of litigation on obstetric care: a nationwide analysis on obstetric practice. Am J Perinatol. 2011;28(4):277–84.PubMedCrossRef

23.

Habiba M, Kaminski M, Da Fre M, et al. Caesarean section on request: a comparison of obstetricians’ attitudes in eight European countries. BJOG. 2006;113(6):647–56.PubMedCrossRef

24.

Al-Mufti R, McCarthy A, Fisk N. Survey of obstetricians’ personal preference and discretionary practice. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1997;73:1–4.PubMedCrossRef

25.

MacDonald C, Pinion S, MacLeod U. Scottish female obstetricians’ views on elective caesarean section and personal choice for delivery. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2002;22:586–9.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Chauhan S, Chauhan V, Cowan B, et al. Professional liability claims and central association of obstetricians and gynecologists members: myth versus reality. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192:1820–6.PubMedCrossRef

27.

Chervenak J. Overview of professional liability. Clin Perinatol. 2007;34:227–32.PubMedCrossRef

28.

Ogburn T, Espey E, Autry A, et al. Why obstetrics/gynecology, and what if it were not an option? A survey of resident applicants. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197:538.PubMedCrossRef

Title: Attitudes of Obstetricians toward Cesarean Delivery in Challenging Cases
Authors: Sareh Samadi
Naeimeh Gholizadeh
Nasrin Shoar
Saeed Shoar
Publication date: 01-10-2013
Publisher: Springer India
Published in: The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India / Issue 5/2013
Print ISSN: 0971-9202
Electronic ISSN: 0975-6434
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-013-0401-7

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Attitudes of Obstetricians toward Cesarean Delivery in Challenging Cases

Abstract

Objective

Method

Result

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Method

Result

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 5/2013

TA-GVHD, a Fatal Complication Following Blood Transfusion from a First-Degree Relative

Perioperative Complications in Vaginal Mesh Procedures Using Trocar in Pelvic Organ Prolapse Repair

Role of Misoprostol 600 mcg Oral in Active Management of Third Stage of Labor: A Comparative Study with Oxytocin 10 IU i.m

Efficacy, User Acceptability, Tolerability, and Cycle Control of a Combined Contraceptive Vaginal Ring: The Indian Perspective

Circulating Vascular Growth Factor (VEGF) Angiopoietin-1 (Angi-1) and Soluble Tie-2 Receptor in Pregnancy Complicated with Pre-eclampsia: A Prospective Study

Evaluation of Rapid Diagnostic Methods of Urinary Protein Estimation in Patients of Preeclampsia of Advanced Gestational Age