PREVALENCE AND ATTITUDE OF WOMEN REGARDING CESAREAN SECTION IN DUHOK CITY-KURDISTAN REGION
Keywords:
Attitude, Delivery mode, Cesarean section
Abstract
https://doi.org/10.31386/dmj.2024.18.1.2
Background: The decision of pregnancy delivery mode is important for both mother and fetus health. Although the advancement in surgical approach of cesarean section, the cesarean section has a negative impact on mothers and fetuses health.
Objective: To assess the rate of cesarean section in a sample of women in Duhok city and their attitudes toward cesarean section.
Methodology: Present study was a descriptive cross sectional that carried out in Obstetrical & Gynecological Clinics of Maternity Hospital, Primary Health Care Centers, Internally Displaced and Refugee Camps and Private Obstetrics Clinics at Duhok city-Kurdistan region/Iraq through duration period of one year from first of November, 2021, to 31st of October, 2022 on sample of four hundred pregnant women. The decision of previous cesarean section for studied women was done by Senior Obstetrician & Gynecologist according to different reasons (clinical or non-clinical).
Results: The history of previous cesarean section was positive in 39.8% of pregnant women, with a common frequency of one cesarean section (58.5%). Most pregnant women perceived that normal delivery is better, while 9% perceived that cesarean section is better. In the same way, 87% of pregnant women preferred normal delivery, while 13% preferred cesarean section. Only 20% of pregnant women believed that cesarean section is the normal way of delivery, while 68% of them thought that mother with a history of cesarean section has a normal delivery in the future. However, 79% of pregnant women believed that mother had a risk of death during cesarean section.
Conclusions: The cesarean section rate in Duhok city is higher than acceptable recommended rate, although the positive attitude of pregnant women toward normal vaginal delivery.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
1. Ashimi A, Amole T, Aliyu L. Knowledge and attitude of pregnant women to caesarean section in a semi-urban community in northwest Nigeria. J West Afr Coll Surg 2013; 3(2):46-61.
2. Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M, Gülmezoglu AM. Method of delivery and pregnancy outcomes in Asia: The WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health 2007-08. Lancet 2010; 375(9713): 490-499.
3. Betrán AP, Torloni MR, Zhang JJ, Gülmezoglu AM. WHO statement on caesarean section rates. BJOG 2016; 123(5): 667-670.
4. Marshall NE, FuR, Guise J. Impact of multiple cesarean deliveries on maternal morbidity: A systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011; 205(30): 262.e1-8.
5. Betrán AP, Ye J, Moller AB, 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.
6. Molina G, Weiser TG, Lipsitz SR, Esquivel MM, Uribe-Leitz T, Azad T, et al. Relationship between cesarean delivery rate and maternal and neonatal mortality. JAMA 2015; 314(21):2263–2270.
7. 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 Report 2010; 30:1–31.
8. Lo JC. Patients’ attitudes vs. physicians’ determination: implications for cesarean sections. Soc Sci Med 2003; 57(1):91-96.
9. 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.
10. Ajeet S, Jaydeep N, Nandkishore K, Nisha R. Women’s knowledge, perceptions, and potential demand towards caesarean section. Natl J Community Med 2011; 2(2):244-248.
11. Anwar I, Nababan HY, Mostari S, Rahman A, Khan JA. Trends and inequities in use of maternal health Care Services in Bangladesh, 1991-2011. PLoS One 2015; 10(3):e0120309.
12. Feng XL, Xu L, Guo Y, Ronsmans C. Factors influencing rising caesarean section rates in China between 1988 and 2008. Bull World Health Organ 2012; 90(1):30–39A.
13. Stanton C, Ronsmans C. Caesarean birth as a component of surgical services in low-and middle-income countries. Bull World Health Organ 2008; 86(12): A. World Health Organization. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.2471/BLT.08.057653
14. Aminu M, Utz B, Halim A, Van Den Broek N. Reasons for performing a caesarean section in public hospitals in rural Bangladesh. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2014; 14(1):130.
15. Einarsdóttir K, Kemp A, Haggar FA, Moorin RE, Gunnell AS, Preen DB, et al. Increase in caesarean deliveries after the Australian private health insurance incentive policy reforms. PLoS One 2012; 7(7):e41436.
16. Potter JE, Hopkins K, Faúndes A, Perpétuo I. Women’s autonomy and scheduled cesarean sections in Brazil: a cautionary tale. Birth 2008; 35(1):33-40.
17. Shabila NP. Rates and trends in cesarean sections between 2008 and 2012 in Iraq. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2017; 17: 22. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-016-1211-6
18. Al-asadi FAS, Ahmad AO, Mohammed RJ, Maasom ZMNM. Preferred Mode of Delivery in Iraqi Primiparous Women. Medico Legal Update 2021; 21(2): 1319–1323. Available from: https://doi.org/10.37506/mlu.v21i2.2875
19. Ahmed KM, Piro TJ. Pregnant Women’s Perception and Attitude towards Mode of Delivery in Erbil City- a Qualitative Study. Erbil j. nurs. midwifery 2022; 5(1):11-12. Available from: https://ejnm.hmu.edu.krd/index.php/ejnm/article/view/175
20. Hu HT, Xu JJ, Lin J, Li C, Wu Y-T, Sheng J-Z, et al. Association between first caesarean delivery and adverse outcomes in subsequent pregnancy: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2018; 18: 273. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-018-1895-x
21. Ahmed HM, Ghanim NA-T. Rate and indications of cesarean section in the Maternity Teaching Hospital in Erbil City, Kurdistan region, Iraq. Zanco Journal of Medical Sciences (Zanco J Med Sci) 2018; 22(2): 148–154. Available from: https://doi.org/10.15218/zjms.2018.020
22. Mohammed AK. A cross-sectional Analytic study of Rate and Indication of Caesarean Section. Research Square; 2022: 1-12. Available from: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1558056/v1
23. Fadhl NN, Zubair OA, Al-Wazzan RM. Prevalence of Caesarean Sections in Mosul City Hospitals :A Cross – Sectional Study. Annals of the College of Medicine Mosul 2021; 42(2): 126-132.
24. Muhei AH, Jamil NF. The Rate and Pattern of Cesarean Section in Al-Yarmouk Teaching Hospital/Baghdad. Iraqi J Comm Med 2018; 4: 133-138.
25. Shirzad M, Shakibazadeh E, Hajimiri K, Betran AP, Jahanfar S, Bohren MA, et al. Prevalence of and reasons for women's, family members', and health professionals' preferences for cesarean section in Iran: a mixed-methods systematic review. Reprod Health 2021; 18(1):3.
26. Eyi EGY, Mollamahmutoglu L. An analysis of the high cesarean section rates in Turkey by Robson classification. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2021; 34(16):2682-2692.
27. Catherine Y, Sponge MD. Prevention of the first cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 2015; 42(2):377–380.
28. Betran AP, Ye J, Moller AB, Souza JP, Zhang J. Trends and projections of caesarean section rates: global and regional estimates. BMJ Glob Health 2021; 6(6):e005671.
29. Fahad A, Makhdoom T. The Rate and Indications of Primary Cesarean Section at Dubai Hospital, Dubai Health Authority, Dubai, UAE. Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2020; 10: 626-633. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4236/ojog.2020.1050056
30. Akhter H, Sen S, Talukder RK, Busreea RA, Chanda K, Yasmin M, et al. Assessment of Indications and Complications of Caesarean Section in A Private Medical College Hospital of Bangladesh. Mymensingh Med J 2020; 29(4):756-763.
31. Gholami A, Faraji Z, Lotfabadi P, Foroozanfar Z, Rezaof M, Rajabi A. Factors associated with preference for repeat cesarean in neyshabur pregnant women. Int J Prev Med 2014; 5(9):1192-1198.
32. Nasir NA, Amir H. Knowledge and attitude of pregnant women towards modes of delivery in an antenatal care clinic in Baghdad. JFac Med Baghdad 2017; 59 (1): 25-30.
33. Ardic C. Role of mother education level in delivery method preference. Fam Pract Palliat Care 2018; 3(1): 28-32.
34. Al Rowaily MA, Alsalem FA, Abolfotouh MA. Cesarean section in a high-parity community in Saudi Arabia: clinical indications and obstetric outcomes. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2014; 14, 92. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-14-92
35. Naa Gandau BB, Nuertey BD, Seneadza NAH, Akaateba D, Azusong E, Yirifere JY, et al. Maternal perceptions about caesarean section deliveries and their role in reducing perinatal and neonatal mortality in the Upper West Region of Ghana; a cross-sectional study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2019; 19(1):350.
36. Panda S, Begley C, Daly D. Influence of women's request and preference on the rising rate of caesarean section - a comparison of reviews. Midwifery 2020; 88:102765.
2. Lumbiganon P, Laopaiboon M, Gülmezoglu AM. Method of delivery and pregnancy outcomes in Asia: The WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health 2007-08. Lancet 2010; 375(9713): 490-499.
3. Betrán AP, Torloni MR, Zhang JJ, Gülmezoglu AM. WHO statement on caesarean section rates. BJOG 2016; 123(5): 667-670.
4. Marshall NE, FuR, Guise J. Impact of multiple cesarean deliveries on maternal morbidity: A systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011; 205(30): 262.e1-8.
5. Betrán AP, Ye J, Moller AB, 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.
6. Molina G, Weiser TG, Lipsitz SR, Esquivel MM, Uribe-Leitz T, Azad T, et al. Relationship between cesarean delivery rate and maternal and neonatal mortality. JAMA 2015; 314(21):2263–2270.
7. 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 Report 2010; 30:1–31.
8. Lo JC. Patients’ attitudes vs. physicians’ determination: implications for cesarean sections. Soc Sci Med 2003; 57(1):91-96.
9. 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.
10. Ajeet S, Jaydeep N, Nandkishore K, Nisha R. Women’s knowledge, perceptions, and potential demand towards caesarean section. Natl J Community Med 2011; 2(2):244-248.
11. Anwar I, Nababan HY, Mostari S, Rahman A, Khan JA. Trends and inequities in use of maternal health Care Services in Bangladesh, 1991-2011. PLoS One 2015; 10(3):e0120309.
12. Feng XL, Xu L, Guo Y, Ronsmans C. Factors influencing rising caesarean section rates in China between 1988 and 2008. Bull World Health Organ 2012; 90(1):30–39A.
13. Stanton C, Ronsmans C. Caesarean birth as a component of surgical services in low-and middle-income countries. Bull World Health Organ 2008; 86(12): A. World Health Organization. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.2471/BLT.08.057653
14. Aminu M, Utz B, Halim A, Van Den Broek N. Reasons for performing a caesarean section in public hospitals in rural Bangladesh. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2014; 14(1):130.
15. Einarsdóttir K, Kemp A, Haggar FA, Moorin RE, Gunnell AS, Preen DB, et al. Increase in caesarean deliveries after the Australian private health insurance incentive policy reforms. PLoS One 2012; 7(7):e41436.
16. Potter JE, Hopkins K, Faúndes A, Perpétuo I. Women’s autonomy and scheduled cesarean sections in Brazil: a cautionary tale. Birth 2008; 35(1):33-40.
17. Shabila NP. Rates and trends in cesarean sections between 2008 and 2012 in Iraq. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2017; 17: 22. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-016-1211-6
18. Al-asadi FAS, Ahmad AO, Mohammed RJ, Maasom ZMNM. Preferred Mode of Delivery in Iraqi Primiparous Women. Medico Legal Update 2021; 21(2): 1319–1323. Available from: https://doi.org/10.37506/mlu.v21i2.2875
19. Ahmed KM, Piro TJ. Pregnant Women’s Perception and Attitude towards Mode of Delivery in Erbil City- a Qualitative Study. Erbil j. nurs. midwifery 2022; 5(1):11-12. Available from: https://ejnm.hmu.edu.krd/index.php/ejnm/article/view/175
20. Hu HT, Xu JJ, Lin J, Li C, Wu Y-T, Sheng J-Z, et al. Association between first caesarean delivery and adverse outcomes in subsequent pregnancy: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2018; 18: 273. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-018-1895-x
21. Ahmed HM, Ghanim NA-T. Rate and indications of cesarean section in the Maternity Teaching Hospital in Erbil City, Kurdistan region, Iraq. Zanco Journal of Medical Sciences (Zanco J Med Sci) 2018; 22(2): 148–154. Available from: https://doi.org/10.15218/zjms.2018.020
22. Mohammed AK. A cross-sectional Analytic study of Rate and Indication of Caesarean Section. Research Square; 2022: 1-12. Available from: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1558056/v1
23. Fadhl NN, Zubair OA, Al-Wazzan RM. Prevalence of Caesarean Sections in Mosul City Hospitals :A Cross – Sectional Study. Annals of the College of Medicine Mosul 2021; 42(2): 126-132.
24. Muhei AH, Jamil NF. The Rate and Pattern of Cesarean Section in Al-Yarmouk Teaching Hospital/Baghdad. Iraqi J Comm Med 2018; 4: 133-138.
25. Shirzad M, Shakibazadeh E, Hajimiri K, Betran AP, Jahanfar S, Bohren MA, et al. Prevalence of and reasons for women's, family members', and health professionals' preferences for cesarean section in Iran: a mixed-methods systematic review. Reprod Health 2021; 18(1):3.
26. Eyi EGY, Mollamahmutoglu L. An analysis of the high cesarean section rates in Turkey by Robson classification. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2021; 34(16):2682-2692.
27. Catherine Y, Sponge MD. Prevention of the first cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 2015; 42(2):377–380.
28. Betran AP, Ye J, Moller AB, Souza JP, Zhang J. Trends and projections of caesarean section rates: global and regional estimates. BMJ Glob Health 2021; 6(6):e005671.
29. Fahad A, Makhdoom T. The Rate and Indications of Primary Cesarean Section at Dubai Hospital, Dubai Health Authority, Dubai, UAE. Open Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2020; 10: 626-633. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4236/ojog.2020.1050056
30. Akhter H, Sen S, Talukder RK, Busreea RA, Chanda K, Yasmin M, et al. Assessment of Indications and Complications of Caesarean Section in A Private Medical College Hospital of Bangladesh. Mymensingh Med J 2020; 29(4):756-763.
31. Gholami A, Faraji Z, Lotfabadi P, Foroozanfar Z, Rezaof M, Rajabi A. Factors associated with preference for repeat cesarean in neyshabur pregnant women. Int J Prev Med 2014; 5(9):1192-1198.
32. Nasir NA, Amir H. Knowledge and attitude of pregnant women towards modes of delivery in an antenatal care clinic in Baghdad. JFac Med Baghdad 2017; 59 (1): 25-30.
33. Ardic C. Role of mother education level in delivery method preference. Fam Pract Palliat Care 2018; 3(1): 28-32.
34. Al Rowaily MA, Alsalem FA, Abolfotouh MA. Cesarean section in a high-parity community in Saudi Arabia: clinical indications and obstetric outcomes. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2014; 14, 92. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2393-14-92
35. Naa Gandau BB, Nuertey BD, Seneadza NAH, Akaateba D, Azusong E, Yirifere JY, et al. Maternal perceptions about caesarean section deliveries and their role in reducing perinatal and neonatal mortality in the Upper West Region of Ghana; a cross-sectional study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2019; 19(1):350.
36. Panda S, Begley C, Daly D. Influence of women's request and preference on the rising rate of caesarean section - a comparison of reviews. Midwifery 2020; 88:102765.
Published
2024-06-07
How to Cite
NORI HASAN, J., MUNIB MAHMOUD, A., & AREF HAJI, L. (2024). PREVALENCE AND ATTITUDE OF WOMEN REGARDING CESAREAN SECTION IN DUHOK CITY-KURDISTAN REGION. Duhok Medical Journal, 18(1), 8-20. Retrieved from https://dmj.uod.ac/index.php/dmj/article/view/295
Section
Articles
