A Qualitative Inquiry to Explore Why Women with Previous Cesarean-Section Do Not Choose Vaginal Birth after Cesarean

M. Firoozi, F. Tara, Mohammad Reza Ahanchian, R. L. Roudsari
{"title":"A Qualitative Inquiry to Explore Why Women with Previous Cesarean-Section Do Not Choose Vaginal Birth after Cesarean","authors":"M. Firoozi, F. Tara, Mohammad Reza Ahanchian, R. L. Roudsari","doi":"10.22038/JMRH.2021.58760.1713","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background and Aim: Complications of cesarean-section are many times more than vaginal birth and increase with repeat it, despite mothers don’t choose vaginal birth after CS. Aim: The aim of the present study is to explain why previous cesarean section mothers not to choose VBAC? \nMethods: A conventional content analysis performed by 25 participants from previous CS mothers (pregnant/non-pregnant) and maternal health care  providers through semi-structured individual interviews and two focus group sessions in Om-Albanin hospital in Mashhad, Iran. The interviews lasted 30 - 90 minutes and their content was recorded, transcribed and analyzed using Graneheim & Lundman’s method (2004). Data validity was verified by Lincoln and Guba criteria. \nResults: The main category of \"loneliness, weakness, fear in VBAC\" emerged from three subcategories: \"non-supportive individual-social perspective\", \" inefficient care \"and \"psychological fear of childbirth\". Sub-subcategories identified as: First sub-subcategory: \" opposite beliefs to VBAC\" ,  \"non-supportive community\" and \" non-supportive individual-social perspective\". second includes: \" inadequate provision of optimal care \",\" inadequate knowledge and awareness \",\" Weakness in decision self-efficacy \"and\" Weakness in effective counseling \" and third  includes: \" negative experiences of vaginal birth \" , \"feeling of danger\" and \"fear\" . \nConclusion: The mothers are conflict in choosing VBAC in three aspects: social, care system and individual dimensions. Comprehensive support including: cultural interventions for vaginal birth, planning a supportive  and special care system for previous CS mothers, increasing knowledge and correcting beliefs will help them in decision  self-efficacy. It is proposed planning of these strategies and assess their effectiveness.","PeriodicalId":283698,"journal":{"name":"Journal of midwifery and reproductive health","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of midwifery and reproductive health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22038/JMRH.2021.58760.1713","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background and Aim: Complications of cesarean-section are many times more than vaginal birth and increase with repeat it, despite mothers don’t choose vaginal birth after CS. Aim: The aim of the present study is to explain why previous cesarean section mothers not to choose VBAC? Methods: A conventional content analysis performed by 25 participants from previous CS mothers (pregnant/non-pregnant) and maternal health care  providers through semi-structured individual interviews and two focus group sessions in Om-Albanin hospital in Mashhad, Iran. The interviews lasted 30 - 90 minutes and their content was recorded, transcribed and analyzed using Graneheim & Lundman’s method (2004). Data validity was verified by Lincoln and Guba criteria. Results: The main category of "loneliness, weakness, fear in VBAC" emerged from three subcategories: "non-supportive individual-social perspective", " inefficient care "and "psychological fear of childbirth". Sub-subcategories identified as: First sub-subcategory: " opposite beliefs to VBAC" ,  "non-supportive community" and " non-supportive individual-social perspective". second includes: " inadequate provision of optimal care "," inadequate knowledge and awareness "," Weakness in decision self-efficacy "and" Weakness in effective counseling " and third  includes: " negative experiences of vaginal birth " , "feeling of danger" and "fear" . Conclusion: The mothers are conflict in choosing VBAC in three aspects: social, care system and individual dimensions. Comprehensive support including: cultural interventions for vaginal birth, planning a supportive  and special care system for previous CS mothers, increasing knowledge and correcting beliefs will help them in decision  self-efficacy. It is proposed planning of these strategies and assess their effectiveness.
有剖宫产史的妇女剖宫产后不选择顺产的定性探讨
背景与目的:剖宫产的并发症是顺产的数倍,且随剖宫产次数的增加而增加,尽管剖宫产后产妇不选择顺产。目的:本研究的目的是解释为什么以前剖宫产的母亲不选择VBAC?方法:在伊朗马什哈德的Om-Albanin医院,通过半结构化的个人访谈和两次焦点小组会议,对来自以前的CS母亲(怀孕/未怀孕)和孕产妇保健提供者的25名参与者进行了常规内容分析。访谈持续30 - 90分钟,访谈内容被记录、转录并使用Graneheim & Lundman的方法(2004)进行分析。数据有效性通过Lincoln和Guba标准验证。结果:VBAC中“孤独、软弱、恐惧”的主要类别由“非支持性个人-社会视角”、“护理效率低下”和“分娩心理恐惧”三个子类别衍生而来。第一个子类别:“与VBAC相反的信念”、“非支持性社区”和“非支持性个人-社会视角”。二是“提供最佳护理不足”、“知识和意识不足”、“决策自我效能感不足”和“有效咨询不足”;三是“阴道分娩的负面经历”、“危险感”和“恐惧”。结论:母亲在VBAC选择上存在社会、护理制度和个体三个维度的矛盾。综合支持包括:对阴道分娩的文化干预,为前CS母亲规划支持性和特殊护理系统,增加知识和纠正信念将有助于他们的决策自我效能感。建议对这些战略进行规划并评估其有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信