Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2004;2004(1):CD003858.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003858.pub2.

Information for pregnant women about caesarean birth

D Horey  1 , J Weaver, H Russell
Affiliations

Information for pregnant women about caesarean birth

D Horey et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004.

Abstract

Background: Information is routinely given to pregnant women, but information about caesarean birth may be inadequate.

Objectives: To examine the effectiveness of information about caesarean birth.

Search strategy: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth register, CENTRAL (26 November 2002), MEDLINE [online via PubMed 1966-] and the Web of Science citation database [1995-] (20 September 2002), and reference lists of relevant articles.

Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials, non-randomised clinical trials and controlled before-and-after studies of information given to pregnant women about caesarean birth.

Data collection and analysis: Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Missing and further data were sought from trial authors unsuccessfully. Analyses were based on 'intention to treat'. Relative risk and confidence intervals were calculated and reported. Consumer reviewers commented on adequacy of information reported in each study.

Main results: Two randomised controlled trials involving 1451 women met the inclusion criteria. Both studies aimed to reduce caesarean births by encouraging women to attempt vaginal delivery. One used a program of prenatal education and support, and the other cognitive therapy to reduce fear. Results were not combined because of differences in the study populations. Non-clinical outcomes were ascertained in both studies through questionnaires, but were subject to rates of loss to follow-up exceeding 10%.A number of important outcomes cannot be reported: knowledge or understanding; decisional conflict; and women's perceptions: of their ability to discuss care with clinicians or family/friends, of whether information needs were met, and of satisfaction with decision-making. Neither study assessed women's perception of participation in decision-making about caesarean birth, but Fraser 1997, who examined the effect of study participation on decision making, found that women in the intervention group were more likely to consider that attempting vaginal birth was easier (51% compared to 28% in control group), or more difficult (10% compared to 6%). These results could be affected by the attrition rate of 11%, and are possibly subject to bias. Neither intervention used in these trials made any difference to clinical outcomes. About 70% or more women attempted vaginal delivery in both trials, yet caesarean delivery rates exceeded 40%, at least 10% higher than was hoped. There was no significant difference between control and intervention groups for any of the outcomes measured: vaginal birth, elective/scheduled caesarean, and attempted vaginal delivery. Outcome data, although similar for both groups, were not sufficient to compare maternal and neonatal morbidity or neonatal mortality. There was no difference in the psychological outcomes for the intervention and control groups reported by either of the included trials. Consumer reviewers said information for women considering a vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) should include: risks of VBAC and elective caesarean; warning signs in labour; philosophy and policies of hospital and staff; strategies to improve chances of success; and information about probability of success with specific care givers.

Reviewer's conclusions: Research has focussed on encouraging women to attempt vaginal delivery. Trials of interventions to encourage women to attempt vaginal birth showed no effect, but shortcomings in study design mean that the evidence is inconclusive. Further research on this topic is urgently needed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None known.

Figures

1.1
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1 Verbal information plus pamphlet versus pamphlet only, Outcome 1 Caesarean delivery.
1.2
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1 Verbal information plus pamphlet versus pamphlet only, Outcome 2 Vaginal birth.
1.3
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1 Verbal information plus pamphlet versus pamphlet only, Outcome 3 Elective/scheduled caesarean.
1.4
1.4. Analysis
Comparison 1 Verbal information plus pamphlet versus pamphlet only, Outcome 4 Attempted vaginal delivery.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

References to studies included in this review

Fraser 1997 {published data only}
    1. Fraser W, Maunsell E, Hodnett E, Moutquin JM. Randomized controlled trial of a prenatal vaginal birth after cesarean section education and support program. American Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 1994;176(2):419‐25. - PubMed
Saisto 2001 {published data only}
    1. Saisto T, Salmela‐Aro K, Nurmi JE, Kononen T, Halmesmaki E. A randomized controlled trial of intervention in fear of childbirth. Obstetrics & Gynecology 2001;98(5):820‐6. - PubMed

References to studies excluded from this review

Fawcett 1993 {published data only}
    1. Fawcett J, Pollio N, Tully A, Baron M, Henklein JC, Jones RC. Effects of information on adaption to cesarean birth. Nursing Research 1993;42(1):49‐53. - PubMed
Greene 1989 {published data only}
    1. Greene PG, Zeichner A, Roberts NL, Callahan EJ, Granados JL. Preparation for cesarean delivery: a multicomponent analysis of treatment outcome. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology 1989;57:484‐7. - PubMed
Kropp 1989 {published data only}
    1. Kropp S, Schmidt S, Saling E. Influences on decisions of pregnant patients with breech presentation for external fetal version or cesarean section ‐ information status and anxiety pattern [Einflusse auf Entscheidungen von Schwangeren mit BEL zur ausseren Wendung oder zur Schnittentbindung‐Aufklarungsstatus and Angstmuster.]. Zeitschrift fur Geburtshilfe und Perinatologie 1989;193(2):84‐91. - PubMed

Additional references

Bamigboye 2003
    1. Bamigboye AA, Hofmeyr GJ. Closure versus non‐closure of the peritoneum at caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2003, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000163] - DOI - PubMed
Bekker 1999
    1. Bekker H, Thornton JG, Airey CM, Connelly JB, Hewison J, Robinson MB, et al. Informed decision making: an annotated bibliography and systematic review. Health Technology Assessment 1999;3(1):1‐156. - PubMed
Brown 1993
    1. Brown S, Lumley J. Antenatal care: a case of the inverse care law?. Australian Journal of Public Health 1993;17(2):95‐103. - PubMed
Butow 1998
    1. Butow P, Brindle E, McConnell D, Boakes R, Tattersall M. Information booklets about cancer: factors influencing patient satisfaction and utilization. Patient Education and Counseling 1998;33(2):129‐41. - PubMed
Callister 1995
    1. Callister LC. Beliefs and perceptions of childbearing women choosing different primary health care providers. Clinical Nursing Research 1995;4(2):168‐80. - PubMed
Charles 1999
    1. Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T. Decision‐making in the physician‐patient encounter: revisiting the shared treatment decision‐making model. Social Science & Medicine 1999;49(5):651‐61. - PubMed
Clarke 2000 [Computer program]
    1. Clarke M, Oxman AD, editors. Cochrane Reviewers’ Handbook 4.1 [updated June 2000]. In: Review Manager (RevMan). Version 4.1. Oxford: The Cochrane Collaboration, 2000.
Coulter 1999
    1. Coulter A, Entwistle V, Gilbert D. Sharing decisions with patients: is the information good enough?. British Medical Journal 1999;318(7179):318‐22. - PMC - PubMed
Creedy 2001
    1. Creedy DK, Noy DL. Postdischarge surveillance after cesarean section. Birth 2001;28(4):264‐9. - PubMed
Domenighetti 2000
    1. Domenighetti G, Grilli R, Maggi JR. Does provision of an evidence‐based information change public willingness to accept screening tests?. Health Expectations 2000;3(2):145‐50. - PMC - PubMed
Edwards 2002
    1. Edwards A, Elwyn G, Mulley A. Explaining risks: turning numerical data into meaningful pictures. BMJ 2002;324(7341):827‐30. - PMC - PubMed
Entwistle 1998
    1. Entwistle VA, Sheldon TA, Sowden A, Watt IS. Evidence‐informed patient choice: practical issues of involving patients in decisions about health care technologies. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 1998;14(2):212‐25. - PubMed
EPOC 1998
    1. Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Collaborative Review Group. The Data Collection Checklist. Revised by Claire Allen, 1998.
Freda 1993
    1. Freda MC, Andersen HF, Damus K, Merkatz IR. What pregnant women want to know: a comparison of client and provider perceptions. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, & Neonatal Nursing 1993;22(3):237‐44. - PubMed
Gamble 2000
    1. Gamble JA, Creedy DK. Women's request for a cesarean section: a critique of the literature. Birth 2000;27(4):256‐63. - PubMed
Gamble 2001
    1. Gamble JA, Creedy DK. Women's preference for a cesarean section: incidence and associated factors. Birth 2001;28(2):101‐10. - PubMed
Garrud 2001
    1. Garrud P, Wood M, Stainsby L. Impact of risk information in a patient education leaflet. Patient Education and Counseling 2001;43(3):301‐4. - PubMed
Graham 1999
    1. Graham WJ, Hundley V, McCheyne AL, Hall MH, Gurney E, Milne J. An investigation of women's involvement in the decision to deliver by caesarean section. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1999;106(3):213‐20. - PubMed
Hopkins 1999
    1. Hopkins L, Smaill F. Antibiotic prophylaxis regimens and drugs for cesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 1999, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001136] - DOI - PubMed
Johanson 2002
    1. Johanson R, Newburn M, McFarlane A. Has the medicalisation of childbirth gone too far?. BMJ 2002;324(7342):892‐5. - PMC - PubMed
Lydon‐Rochelle 2000
    1. Lydon‐Rochelle M, Holt VL, Martin DP, Easterling TR. Association between method of delivery and maternal rehospitalization. JAMA 2000;283(18):2411‐6. - PubMed
Mangesi 2002
    1. Mangesi L, Hofmeyr GJ. Early compared with delayed oral fluids and food after caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2002, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003516] - DOI - PMC - PubMed
Mould 1996
    1. Mould TA, Chong S, Spencer JA, Gallivan S. Women's involvement with the decision preceding their caesarean section and their degree of satisfaction. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1996;103(11):1074‐7. - PubMed
Nassar 2001
    1. Nassar N, Sullivan EA. Australia's Mothers and Babies 1999. Sydney: AIHW National Perinatal Statistics Unit (Perinatal Statistics Series No. 11), 2001.
O'Connor 2002
    1. O'Connor AM, Stacey D, Rovner D, Holmes‐Rovner M, Tetroe J, Llewellyn‐Thomas H, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2002, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431] - DOI - PubMed
Potter 2001
    1. Potter JE, Berquo E, Perpetuo IHO, Leal OF, Hopkins K, Souza MR, et al. Unwanted caesarean sections among public and private patients in Brazil: prospective study. BMJ 2001;323(7322):1155‐8. - PMC - PubMed
Quinlivan 1999
    1. Quinlivan JA, Petersen RW, Nichols CN. Patient preference the leading indication for elective caesarean section in public patients ‐ results of a 2‐year prospective audit in a teaching hospital. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1999;39(2):207‐14. - PubMed
Robinson 2001
    1. Robinson A, Thomson R. Variability in patient preferences for participating in medical decision making: implication for the use of decision support tools. Quality in Health Care 2001;10(Suppl 1):i34‐8. - PMC - PubMed
Ryding 1993
    1. Ryding EL. Investigation of 33 women who demanded a cesarean section for personal reasons. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 1993;72(4):280‐5. - PubMed
Shepperd 1997
    1. Shepperd S. DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer information on treatment choices. Oxford: University of Oxford, 1997. - PMC - PubMed
Shorten 2003
    1. Shorten A, Chamberlain M, Shorten B, Kariminia A. Making choices for childbirth: development and testing of a decision‐aid for women who have experienced previous caesarean. Patient Education and Counseling 2003;52(3):307‐13. [DOI: 10.1016/S0738-3991(03)00106-X] - DOI - PubMed
Silburn 2000
    1. Silburn K. Communicating with consumers: good practice guide to providing information. Melbourne: Department of Human Services, 2000.
Sjogren 1997
    1. Sjogren B, Thomassen P. Obstetric outcome in 100 women with severe anxiety over childbirth. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 1997;76(10):948‐52. - PubMed
Smaill 2002
    1. Smaill F, Hofmeyr GJ. Antibiotic prophylaxis for cesarean section (Cochrane Review). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2002, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000933] - DOI - PubMed
Stapleton 2002
    1. Stapleton H, Kirkham M, Thomas G. Qualitative study of evidence based leaflets in maternity care. British Medical Journal 2002;324:639. - PMC - PubMed
Thomas 2001
    1. Thomas J, Paranjothy S, Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Clinical Effectiveness Support Unit. National Sentinel Caesarean Section Audit Report. RCOG Press, 2001.
Thompson 2002
    1. Thompson J, Roberts CL, Currie M, Ellwood DA. Prevalence and persistence of health problems after childbrith: associations with parity and method of birth. Birth 2002;29(2):83‐94. - PubMed
Tito 1995
    1. Commonwealth Department of Human Services and Health. Review of professional indemnity arrangements for health care professionals (Tito F, chair). Compensation and professional indemnity in health care: a final report. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service, 1995.
Turnbull 1999
    1. Turnbull DA, Wilkinson C, Yaser A, Carty V, Svigos JM, Robinson JS. Women's role and satisfaction in the decision to have a caesarian section. Medical Journal of Australia 1999;170(12):580‐3. - PubMed
Wilkinson 2002
    1. Wilkinson C, Enkin MW. Absorbable staples for uterine incision at caesarean section. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 1996, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000005] - DOI - PubMed
Zib 1999
    1. Zib M, Lim L, Walters WA. Symptoms during normal pregnancy: a prospective controlled study. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1999;39(4):401‐10. - PubMed

Publication types