Attitude of pregnant women in south western Nigeria towards caesarean section as a method of birth
Keywords:
Attitude, Acceptance, Caesarean section, Knowledge, Methods of birthAbstract
Background: Choice of the method of birth is an essential decision for pregnant women and the spouse. This choice is sometimes based on a number of factors. This study assesses knowledge of pregnant women about caesarean section, their attitude towards it and level of acceptance of the methods of birth among women.
Methods: This descriptive study was carried out in a government owned hospital in south western Nigeria. Respondents were selected using accidental sampling techniques. Questionnaire whose validity and reliability has been previously ascertained was the instrument used for data collection. Data generated was analysed using SPSS.
Results: Results show that 17.1% of the women have good knowledge of caesarean section as a method of birth. Majority of the respondents agreed that vaginal delivery creates more mother-baby relationship than caesarean section. 69.5% of the respondents agreed that caesarean section is preferable to vaginal delivery as the pain in vaginal delivery is usually unpleasant, 66.0%) disagreed that babies born through caesarean section are more healthy than their other counterpart that are born through vaginal delivery. Only 6.9% accept caesarean section.
Conclusions: Mothers should therefore be educated on the process involved in caesarean birth and the advantage of this method of birth over other birth method.
Metrics
References
Klein MC, Kaczorowski J, Hearps SJ, Tomkinson J, Baradaran N, Hall WA, et al. Birth technology and maternal roles in birth: knowledge and attitudes of Canadian women approaching childbirth for the first time. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2011;33(6):598-608.
Rozenburg P. Evaluation of the caesarean section rate: a necessary progress in obstetrics. J Gynaecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2004 Jun;33(4):279-89.
Nira S. Shrestha, Sumita Pradhan. On demand caesarean section: what’s women’s attitude? N J Obstet Gynaecol. 2007 Nov-Dec;2(2):12-5.
Behagus DP, Victoria CG, & Barros FC. Consumer demand for caesarean section in Brazil: informed decision making patient choice, or social inequality? A population based birth cohort study linking ethnographic and epidemiological methods. Br Med J. 2002;(324):942-5.
Reproductive and Child Health Unit. Reproductive health strategic plan. In: RCHD, eds. Annual Report. Ghana: Public Health Division, Ghana Health Service; 2003: 23.
Oladapo OT, Sotunsa JO, Sule-Odu AO. A rise in caesarean birth rate in Sagamu, Nigeria: a reflection of changes in obstetric practice. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2004 Jun;24(4):377-81.
Awoyinka BS, Ayinde OA, Omigbodun AO. Acceptability of caesarean delivery to antenatal patients in a tertiary health facility in South West Nigeria. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2006 Apr;26(3):208-10
McGurgan P, Coulter-Smith S, O’Donovan PJ. A national confidential survey of obstetrician’s personal preferences regarding mode of delivery. Eur J Obstet Gynaecol Reprod Biol. 2001;97:17-9.
Kwee A, Cohlen BJ, Kanhai HHH, Bruinse HW, Visser GHA. Caesarean section on request: a survey in the Netherlands. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2004;113:186-90.
Osis MJD, Padua KS, Duarte GA, Souza TR, Faundes A. The opinion of Brazilian women regarding vaginal labour and caesarean section. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2001;75:S59-66.
Chong ESY, Mongelli M. Attitudes of Singapore women towards caesarean and vaginal deliveries. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2003;80:189-94.
Lee S, Khang Y, Lee M. Women’s Attitudes toward mode of delivery in South Korea: a society with high caesarean section rates. Birth. 2004;31(2):108-16.
Donati S, Grandolgo MD, Andreozzi S. Do Italian mothers prefer caesarean delivery? Birth. 2003;30(2):89-93.
Aslam MF, Gilmour K, Fawdry RDS. Who wants a caesarean section? A study of women’s personal experience of vaginal and caesarean delivery. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2003;23(4):364-66.
Gamble JA, Creedy DK. Women’s preference for a caesarean section: incidence and associated factors. Birth. 2001;28(2):101-10.
Liu S, Heaman M, Joseph KS, Liston RM, Huang L, Sauve R, et al. Risk of maternal postpartum readmission associated with mode of delivery. Obstet Gynaecol 2005;105:836-42.
Liu S, Liston RM, Joseph KS, Heaman S, Sauve R, Kramer MS, et al. Maternal mortality and severe morbidity associated with low-risk planned cesarean delivery versus planned vaginal delivery at term. Can Med Assoc J. 2007;176:455-60.
Liston FA, Allen VM, O’Connell CM, Jangaard KA. Neonatal outcomes with cesarean delivery at term. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonat Ed. 2008;93:F176-82.
Wax J, Cartin A, Pinette M, Blackstone J. Patient choice cesarean: an evidence-based review. Obstet Gynaecol Surv. 2004;59:601-16.
Aziken M, Omo-Aghoja L, Okonofua F. Perceptions and attitudes of pregnant women towards caesarean section in urban Nigeria. Acta Obstet Gynaecol Scand. 2007;86(1):42-7.
Aali BS, Motamedi B. Women’s knowledge and attitude towards modes of delivery in Kerman, Islamic Republic of Iran. East Mediterr Health J. 2005;11(4):663-72.
Cunningham FC, Williams JW. Caesarean delivery. In: Cunningham FC, Williams JW, eds. William’s Obstetrics. 20th ed. Stamford, Connecticut: Appleton & Lange; 1997: 509-530.
