Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Trials
Published in: Trials 1/2020

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Sectio Ceasarea | Study protocol

Effect of “motivational interviewing” and “information, motivation, and behavioral skills” counseling interventions on choosing the mode of delivery in pregnant women: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Authors: Mahboubeh Shirzad, Elham Shakibazadeh, Abbas Rahimi Foroushani, Mehrandokht Abedini, Hamid Poursharifi, Sohrab Babaei

Published in: Trials | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Cesarean section is an important surgical procedure, when normal vaginal delivery imposes a risk to mother and/or baby. The World Health Organization states the ideal rate for Cesarean section to be between 10 and 15% of all births. In recent decades, the rate has been increased dramatically worldwide. This paper explains the protocol of a randomized controlled trial that aims to compare the effect of “motivational interviewing” and “information, motivation, and behavioral skills” counseling interventions on choosing mode of delivery in pregnant women.

Methods

A four-armed, parallel-design randomized controlled trial will be conducted on pregnant women. One hundred and twenty women will be randomly assigned to four groups including three intervention groups and one control group. The intervention groups included the following: (1) motivational interviewing; (2) face-to-face information, motivation, and behavioral skills model; and (3) information, motivation, and behavioral skills model provided using a mobile application. The inclusion criteria include being literate, being in gestational age from 24 to 32 weeks, being able to speak Persian, having no complications in the current pregnancy, having no indications for Cesarean section, and having enough time to participate in the intervention. The primary outcome of the study is the mode of delivery. The secondary outcomes are women’s intention to undergo Cesarean section and women’s self-efficacy.

Discussion

The interventions of this protocol have been programmed to reduce unnecessary Cesarean sections. Findings may contribute to a rise in normal vaginal delivery, and the effective intervention may be extended for use in national Cesarean section plans.

Trial registration

Iran Randomized Clinical Trial Center IRCT201512080254​31N7. Registered on December 07, 2018.
Literature
1.
Ahmad Nia S, Delavar B, Eini Zinab H, Kazemipour S, Mehryar A, Naghavi M. Caesarean section in the Islamic Republic of Iran: prevalence and some sociodemographic correlates; 2009..
2.
3.
Betrán AP, Ye J, Moller A-B, Zhang J, Gülmezoglu AM, Torloni MR. The increasing trend in caesarean section rates: global, regional and national estimates: 1990-2014. PLoS One. 2016;11(2):e0148343.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
4.
Yavangi M, Sohrabi M-R, Alishahi TA. Effect of Iranian ministry of health protocols on cesarean section rate: a quasi-experimental study. J Res Health Sci. 2013;13(1):48–52.PubMed
5.
Azami-Aghdash S, Ghojazadeh M, Dehdilani N, Mohammadi M. Prevalence and causes of cesarean section in Iran: systematic review and meta-analysis. Iran J Public Health. 2014;43(5):545.PubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Omani-Samani R, Mohammadi M, Almasi-Hashiani A, Maroufizadeh S. Cesarean section and socioeconomic status in Tehran. Iran J Res Health Sci. 2017;17(4):e00394.PubMed
7.
Mohamadbeigi A, Tabatabaee SH, Mohammad Salehi N, Yazdani M. Factors influencing cesarean delivery method in Shiraz hospitals. Iran J Nurs. 2009;21(56):37–45.
8.
Kingdon C, Downe S, Betran AP. Women’s and communities’ views of targeted educational interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean section: a qualitative evidence synthesis. Reprod Health. 2018;15(1):130.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
9.
Gregory KD, Jackson S, Korst L, Fridman M. Cesarean versus vaginal delivery: whose risks? Whose benefits? Am J Perinatol. 2012;29(01):07–18.CrossRef
10.
Creasy R, Resnik R, Iams J. Clinical aspects of normal and abnormal labor. Matern Fetal Med. 1984;5:543–9.
11.
Guise J-M, Eden K, Emeis C, Denman MA, Marshall N, Fu RR, et al. Vaginal birth after cesarean: new insights. Evid Rep Technol Assess. 2010;191:1.
12.
Souza JP, Gülmezoglu A, Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M, Carroli G, Fawole B, et al. Caesarean section without medical indications is associated with an increased risk of adverse short-term maternal outcomes: the 2004-2008 WHO Global Survey on Maternal and Perinatal Health. BMC Med. 2010;8(1):71.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
13.
Ramashwar S. In Asia, cesarean section associated with increased risk of neonatal mortality. Int Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2010;36(2):116.
14.
Rothenberg KH. National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference Statement: cesarean delivery on maternal request. Obstetrics Gynecol. 2006;107:1386.CrossRef
15.
Menacker F, Hamilton BE. Recent trends in cesarean delivery in the United States; 2010.CrossRef
16.
Buchholz N-P, Daly-Grandeau E, Huber-Buchholz M-M. Urological complications associated with caesarean section. Eur J Obstetrics Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1994;56(3):161–3.CrossRef
17.
Organization WH. WHO statement on caesarean section rates; 2018. p. 12.
18.
Shirzad M, Shakibazadeh E, Betran AP, Bohren MA, Abedini M. Women’s perspectives on health facility and system levels factors influencing mode of delivery in Tehran: a qualitative study. Reprod Health. 2019;16(1):15.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
19.
Rashidian A, Moradi G, Takian A, Sakha MA, Salavati S, Faraji O, et al. Effects of the Health Transformation Plan on caesarean section rate in the Islamic Republic of Iran: an interrupted time series. 2018.
20.
Yazdizadeh B, Nedjat S, Mohammad K, Rashidian A, Changizi N, Majdzadeh R. Cesarean section rate in Iran, multidimensional approaches for behavioral change of providers: a qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2011;11(1):159.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
21.
Bagheri A, Masoodi-Alavi N, Abbaszade F. Effective factors for choosing the delivery method among the pregnant women in Kashan. KAUMS J (FEYZ). 2012;16(2):146–53.
22.
Lotfi R, Ramezani TF, Torkestani F, Rostami DM, Abedini M, Sajedinejad S. Health system management and strategies to decrease elective cesarean section: a qualitative study; 2015.
23.
Shams M, Mousavizadeh A, Parhizkar S, Maleki M, Angha P. Development a tailored intervention to promote normal vaginal delivery among primigravida women: a formative research. Iran J Obstetrics Gynecol Infertil. 2016;19(30):9–25.
24.
Shahoei R, Rostami F, Khosravi F, Ranayi F, Hasheminasab L, Hesami K, et al. Women lived experience of choice of cesarean delivery: a phenomenology study. Iran J Obstetrics Gynecol Infertil. 2014;17(104):1–10.
25.
Abbaspour Z, Moghaddam BI, Ahmadi F, Kazemnejad A. Women’s fear of childbirth and its impact on selection of birth method: a qualitative study; 2014.
26.
Rahnama P, Mohammadi K, Montazeri A. Salient beliefs towards vaginal delivery in pregnant women: a qualitative study from Iran. Reprod Health. 2015;13(1):7.CrossRef
27.
Javaheri F, Hashemikhah Z. Voluntary cesarean the study on female existential experiences based on a sample from Tehran; 2016.
28.
Hajian S, Shariati M, Najmabadi KM, Yunesian M, Ajami ME. Psychological predictors of intention to deliver vaginally through the extended parallel process model: a mixed-method approach in pregnant Iranian women. Oman Med J. 2013;28(6):395.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
Hajian S, Vakilian K, Shariati M, Esmaeel AM. Attitude of pregnant women, midwives, obstetricians and anesthesiologists toward mode of delivery: a qualitative study; 2011.
30.
Tohid S, St EN. How do women's decisions process to elective cesarean?: a qualitative study. Aust J Basic Appl Sci. 2011;5(6):210–5.
31.
Shahoei R, Rezaei M, Ranaei F, Khosravy F, Zaheri F. Kurdish women’s preference for mode of birth: a qualitative study. Int J Nurs Pract. 2014;20(3):302–9.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Latifnejad-Roudsari R, Zakerihamidi M, Merghati-Khoei E, Kazemnejad A. Cultural perceptions and preferences of Iranian women regarding cesarean delivery. Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res. 2014;19(7 Suppl1):S28.PubMedPubMedCentral
33.
Bayrami R, Valizadeh L, Zaheri F. Nulliparous women’s childbirth experiences: a phenomenological study; 2011.
34.
35.
Faisal I, Matinnia N, Hejar A, Khodakarami Z. Why do primigravidae request caesarean section in a normal pregnancy? A qualitative study in Iran. Midwifery. 2014;30(2):227–33.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Abbaspoor Z, Moghaddam-Banaem L, Ahmadi F, Kazemnejad LA. Postnatal sexual concerns regarding the selection of delivery mode among Iranian women: a qualitative content analysis. J Midwifery Reprod Health. 2016;4(2):613–21.
37.
Besharati F, Hazavehei S, Moeini B, Moghimbeigi A. Effect of educational interventions based on theory of planned behavior (TPB) in selecting delivery mode among pregnant women referred to Rasht health centers. J Zanjan Univ Med Sci Health Serv. 2011;19(77):10.
38.
Soltani F, Eskandari Z, Khodakarami B, Parsa P, Roshanaei G. The effect of self-efficacy oriented counselling on controlling the fear of natural delivery in primigravida women. J Pharm Sci Res. 2017;9(10):1757–61.
39.
Sharifirad G, Rezaeian M, Soltani R, Javaheri S, Mazaheri MA. A survey on the effects of husbands education of pregnant women on knowledge, attitude, and reducing elective cesarean section. Health Serv Res. 2010;6(1):7–12.
40.
Rasouli M, Mousavi SA, Khosravi A, Keramat A, Fooladi E, Atashsokhan G. The impact of motivational interviewing on behavior stages of nulliparous pregnant women preparing for childbirth: a randomized clinical trial. J Psychosom Obstet Gynecol. 2018;39(3):237–45.CrossRef
41.
Organization WH. WHO recommendations non-clinical interventions to reduce unnecessary caesarean sections: World Health Organization; 2018.
42.
Walker R, Turnbull D, Wilkinson C. Strategies to address global cesarean section rates: a review of the evidence. Birth. 2002;29(1):28–39.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Chen I, Opiyo N, Tavender E, Mortazhejri S, Rader T, Petkovic J, Yogasingam S, Taljaard M, Agarwal S, Laopaiboon M, Wasiak J, Khunpradit S, Lumbiganon P, Gruen RL, Betran AP. Non-clinical interventions for reducing unnecessary caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;9(9):CD005528. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​14651858.​CD005528.
44.
Bastani F, Hidarnia A, Montgomery KS, Aguilar-Vafaei ME, Kazemnejad A. Does relaxation education in anxious primigravid Iranian women influence adverse pregnancy outcomes?: a randomized controlled trial. J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 2006;20(2):138–46.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Saisto T, Salmela-Aro K, Nurmi J-E, Könönen T, Halmesmäki E. A randomized controlled trial of intervention in fear of childbirth. Obstet Gynecol. 2001;98(5):820–6.PubMed
46.
Rouhe H, Salmela-Aro K, Toivanen R, Tokola M, Halmesmäki E, Saisto T. Obstetric outcome after intervention for severe fear of childbirth in nulliparous women–randomised trial. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;120(1):75–84.CrossRef
47.
Navaee M, Abedian Z. Effect of role play education on primiparous women’s fear of natural delivery and their decision on the mode of delivery. Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res. 2015;20(1):40.PubMedPubMedCentral
48.
Miller WR. Motivational interviewing: research, practice, and puzzles. Addict Behav. 1996;21(6):835–42.PubMedCrossRef
49.
Hoseini Haji SZ, Firoozi M, Asghari Pour N, Taghi SM. Impact of motivational interviewing on women’s knowledge, attitude and intention to choose vaginal birth after caesarean section: a randomized clinical trial. J Midwifery Reprod Health. 2019;8(1):1–11.
50.
Fisher WA, Fisher JD, Harman J. The information-motivation-behavioral skills model: a general social psychological approach to understanding and promoting health behavior. Soc Psychol Foundations Health Illn. 2003;82:106.
51.
Free C, Phillips G, Galli L, Watson L, Felix L, Edwards P, et al. The effectiveness of mobile-health technology-based health behaviour change or disease management interventions for health care consumers: a systematic review. PLoS Med. 2013;10(1):e1001362.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
52.
53.
Dayer L, Heldenbrand S, Anderson P, Gubbins PO, Martin BC. Smartphone medication adherence apps: potential benefits to patients and providers. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2013;53(2):172–81.CrossRef
54.
Price M, Yuen EK, Goetter EM, Herbert JD, Forman EM, Acierno R, et al. mHealth: a mechanism to deliver more accessible, more effective mental health care. Clin Psychol Psychother. 2014;21(5):427–36.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Shirzad M, Shakibazadeh E, Hajimiri KH, Betran AP, Jahanfar S, Meghan A, Bohren ON, Long Q, Kingdon C, Colomar M, Abedini M. Prevalence of and reasons for women’s, family members’, and health professionals’ preferences for cesarean section in Iran: a mixed-methods systematic review; 2019.
56.
Khorsandi M, Ghofranipour F, Faghihzadeh S, Hidarnia A, Akbarzadeh Bagheban A, Aguilar-Vafaie ME. Iranian version of childbirth self-efficacy inventory. J Clin Nurs. 2008;17(21):2846–55.PubMedCrossRef
57.
ShahrakiSanavi F, Navidian A, Rakhshani F, Ansari-Moghaddam A. The effect of education on base the Theory of Planned Behavior toward normal delivery in pregnant women with intention elective cesarean. Hormozgan Med J. 2014;17(6):531–9.
58.
Lowe NK. Maternal confidence for labor: development of the childbirth self-efficacy inventory. Res Nurs Health. 1993;16(2):141–9.PubMedCrossRef
59.
Wanous JP, Hudy MJ. Single-item reliability: a replication and extension. Organ Res Methods. 2001;4(4):361–75.CrossRef
60.
Gibbons L, Belizán JM, Lauer JA, Betrán AP, Merialdi M, Althabe F. The global numbers and costs of additionally needed and unnecessary caesarean sections performed per year: overuse as a barrier to universal coverage. World Health Rep. 2010;30:1–31.
61.
Arefi Z, Hekamatpou D, Ali Orouji M, Shaahmadi Z, Khushemehri G, Shaahmadi F. The effect of educational intervention based on BASNEF model on decreasing the cesarean section rate among pregnant women in Khomain country. J Fami Reprod Health. 2015;9(3):101.
62.
Moffat M, Bell JS, Porter MA, Lawton S, Hundley V, Danielian P, et al. Decision making about mode of delivery among pregnant women who have previously had a caesarean section: a qualitative study. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2007;114(1):86–93.CrossRef
63.
Roudsari RL, Zakerihamidi M, Khoei EM. Socio-cultural beliefs, values and traditions regarding women’s preferred mode of birth in the North of Iran. Int J Commun Based Nurs Midwifery. 2015;3(3):165–76.
64.
Zakerihamidi M, Roudsari RL, Khoei EM. Vaginal delivery vs. cesarean section: a focused ethnographic study of women’s perceptions in the north of Iran. Int J Commun Based Nurs Midwifery. 2015;3(1):39.
65.
66.
Ahmad SHirvani M, Bagheri-Nesami M, Tayebi T. Exploration of women birth experiences role in decisiding the type of next delivery. J Nurs Midwifery Urmia Univ Med Sci. 2014;12(4):286–96.
67.
Borghei NS, Taghipour A, Latifnejad RR. The concern of fetal health: women’s experiences of worries during pregnancy. Iran J Obstetrics Gynecol Infertil. 2016;19(28):10–21.
68.
Sanavi FS, Rakhshani F, Ansari-Moghaddam A, Edalatian M. Reasons for elective cesarean section amongst pregnant women; a qualitative study. J Reprod Infertil. 2012;13(4):237–40.PubMedPubMedCentral
69.
Darvishi E, Mortazavi S, Nedjat S, Holakouie NK. Experiences of women and gynecologists on the choice of delivery method: a qualitative research. J Health Sys Res. 2012;8:59–68.
70.
Javaheri F, Hashemikhah Z. Voluntary cesarean the study on female existential experiences based on a sample from Tehran. Women’s strategic studies (ketabe zanan). Spring. 2016;18:7–28.
71.
Mansoureh Jamshidi Manesh LJ, Oskouie SF, Sanagoo A. How do women’s decisions process to elective cesarean?: a qualitative study. Aust J Basic Appl Sci. 2011;5(6):210–5.
72.
Hajian S, Vakilian K, Shariati M, Ajami ME. Attitude of pregnant women, midwives, obstetricians and anesthesiologists toward mode of delivery: a qualitative study. Health Monit J Iran Inst Health Sci Res. 2011;10(1):39–48.
73.
Rahnama P, Mohammadi K. Behavioral beliefs about cesarean section according to the theory of planned behavior in pregnant women. J Mazandaran Univ Med Sci. 2015;24(122):169–78.
74.
Abbaspoor Z, Moghaddam-Banaem L, Ahmadi F, Kazemnejad A. Iranian mothers’ selection of a birth method in the context of perceived norms: a content analysis study. Midwifery. 2014;30(7):804–9.PubMedCrossRef
75.
AbouAli Vedadhir FH, Sadati SMH. Childbearing as a socio-cultural issue: constructionism contemplation of Caesarean section in Tabriz, Iran. Iran J Anthropol Res. 2011;1(2):111–35.
76.
Borsari B, Carey KB. Effects of a brief motivational intervention with college student drinkers. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2000;68(4):728.PubMedCrossRef
77.
Walton GM, Cohen GL. A brief social-belonging intervention improves academic and health outcomes of minority students. Science. 2011;331(6023):1447–51.PubMedCrossRef
78.
McCambridge J, Saitz R. Rethinking brief interventions for alcohol in general practice. Bmj. 2017;356:j116.PubMedCrossRef
79.
Rubak S, Sandbæk A, Lauritzen T, Christensen B. Motivational interviewing: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Gen Pract. 2005;55(513):305–12.PubMedPubMedCentral
80.
Chang SJ, Choi S, Kim S-A, Song M. Intervention strategies based on information-motivation-behavioral skills model for health behavior change: a systematic review. Asian Nurs Res. 2014;8(3):172–81.CrossRef
81.
Boulos MNK, Wheeler S, Tavares C, Jones R. How smartphones are changing the face of mobile and participatory healthcare: an overview, with example from eCAALYX. Biomed Eng Online. 2011;10(1):24.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Effect of “motivational interviewing” and “information, motivation, and behavioral skills” counseling interventions on choosing the mode of delivery in pregnant women: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Authors
Mahboubeh Shirzad
Elham Shakibazadeh
Abbas Rahimi Foroushani
Mehrandokht Abedini
Hamid Poursharifi
Sohrab Babaei
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Trials / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6215
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-020-04865-3

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

Trials 1/2020 Go to the issue

Study protocol

Care after pancreatic resection according to an algorithm for early detection and minimally invasive management of pancreatic fistula versus current practice (PORSCH-trial): design and rationale of a nationwide stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial

Update

Progressive exercise compared with best practice advice, with or without corticosteroid injection, for the treatment of rotator cuff disorders: statistical analysis plan for the Getting it Right: Addressing Shoulder Pain (GRASP) 2 × 2 factorial multicentre randomised controlled trial

Study protocol

Impact of an integrated nutrition, health, water sanitation and hygiene, psychosocial care and support intervention package delivered during the pre- and peri-conception period and/or during pregnancy and early childhood on linear growth of infants in the first two years of life, birth outcomes and nutritional status of mothers: study protocol of a factorial, individually randomized controlled trial in India

Research

Why do patients take part in research? An overview of systematic reviews of psychosocial barriers and facilitators

Study protocol

Postoperative analgesia of scalp nerve block with ropivacaine in pediatric craniotomy patients: a protocol for a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded trial

Study protocol

Online-group intervention after suicide bereavement through the use of webinars: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial