» Articles » PMID: 18021149

A Critique of the Literature on Women's Request for Cesarean Section

Overview
Journal Birth
Date 2007 Nov 21
PMID 18021149
Citations 35
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The influence of women's birth preferences on the rising cesarean section rates is uncertain and possibly changing. This review of publications relating to women's request for cesarean delivery explores assumptions related to the social, cultural, and political-economic contexts of maternity care and decision making.

Method: A search of major databases was undertaken using the following terms: "c(a)esarean section" with "maternal request,""decision-making,""patient participation,""decision-making-patient,""patient satisfaction,""patient preference,""maternal choice,""on demand," and "consumer demand." Seventeen papers examining women's preferred type of birth were retrieved.

Results: No studies systematically examined information provided to women by health professionals to inform their decision. Some studies did not adequately acknowledge the influence of obstetric and psychological factors in relation to women's request for a cesarean section. Other potential influences were poorly addressed, including whether or not the doctor advised a vaginal birth, women's access to midwifery care in pregnancy, information provision, quality of care, and cultural issues.

Discussion: The psychosocial context of obstetric care reveals a power imbalance in favor of physicians. Research into decision making about cesarean section that does not account for the way care is offered, observe interactions between women and practitioners, and analyze the context of care should be interpreted with caution.

Citing Articles

Trend and Sociodemographic Correlates of Cesarean Section Utilization in Nepal: Evidence from Demographic and Health Surveys 2006-2016.

Acharya K, Paudel Y Biomed Res Int. 2021; 2021:8888267.

PMID: 33997044 PMC: 8112916. DOI: 10.1155/2021/8888267.


Do women prefer caesarean sections? A qualitative evidence synthesis of their views and experiences.

Colomar M, Opiyo N, Kingdon C, Long Q, Nion S, Bohren M PLoS One. 2021; 16(5):e0251072.

PMID: 33951101 PMC: 8099111. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0251072.


Worth the Weight? Recent Trends in Obstetric Practices, Gestational Age, and Birth Weight in the United States.

Tilstra A, Masters R Demography. 2020; 57(1):99-121.

PMID: 31997231 PMC: 8350969. DOI: 10.1007/s13524-019-00843-w.


Evidence of overuse? Patterns of obstetric interventions during labour and birth among Australian mothers.

Fox H, Callander E, Lindsay D, Topp S BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019; 19(1):226.

PMID: 31272397 PMC: 6611001. DOI: 10.1186/s12884-019-2369-5.


How is women's demand for caesarean section measured? A systematic literature review.

Schantz C, de Loenzien M, Goyet S, Ravit M, Dancoisne A, Dumont A PLoS One. 2019; 14(3):e0213352.

PMID: 30840678 PMC: 6402700. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0213352.