The autonomous choice of delivery mode: A survey of Tunisian women

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Kaouther Dimassi
Meriem Melki
Amal Chebbi
Rim Rafrafi

Abstract

ABSTRACT
Background: The recent overmedication of childbirth process ignores mothers wishes.  In Tunisia, women are not involved in decision-making during childbirth.
Aim: To analyze the opinion of a sample of Tunisian women regarding the possibility of making their own informed choices during childbirth and to determine the factors that may influence the requested mode of delivery.
Methods: This was a 5-month descriptive cross-sectional survey. Were included: Tunisian women who were consultants or practitioners at a university obstetrics and gynaecology department in Tunis; female medicine students or members of women dedicated social network groups.
The questionnaire was applied during direct interviews or posted online. The main judgment criteria was: participants' opinion regarding access to autonomous choice of delivery mode. Participants were initially enrolled into 2 groups:
•    group of women requesting access to autonomous choice.
•    group of women who do not request access to autonomous choice. 
The participants were then divided into 2 other groups according to the requested mode of delivery:
•    Group : Cesarean section
•    Group: Vaginal delivery.
A multivariate logistic regression was used to identify risk factors that may have influenced the responses.

Results: The total number of participants was 197. Access to autonomous choice was requested by 63.45% of the participants. These were mainly: consultants: OR=7.76 95% CI [0.56-106.16] or practitioners: OR=3.93 95% CI [0.01-829.03], with a high level of education OR=1.22 95% CI [0-1174.40], with a past positive birth experience: OR=1.24 95% CI [0.27-5.74]. The women who did not claim access to autonomous choices were mainly: doctors OR=-0.31 95% CI [0-32.58], midwives: OR=-0.08, 95% CI [0-18.12] or even housewives OR=-0.42 95% CI [0-68.88].
The women who preferred to give birth by Caesarean section were mainly: practitioners: OR=2.03 95% CI [0.53-7.81], nulliparous OR=2.51 95% CI [0.243-25.98], pregnant OR= 4.44 95% CI [1.03-19.13], with a history of cesarean delivery: OR=5.68 95% CI [0.64- 50.43] or even a history of negative childbirth experience: OR=1.87 95% CI [0.22-15.85].

Conclusion: The request for an Autonomous choice during childbirth most often expresses a certain number of beliefs and fears. Obstetricians should take time to listen and explain, in order to understand the mother's anxieties and enable her to resolve them. Based on the principles of justice, the access to autonomous choices during childbirth process should be universally recognized by legislations and thus fairly respected for all.

Keywords:

childbirth, pregnancy, autonomy, maternal request, Birth ethics.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

References

  1. 1. Vercoustre L. « Choisir sa voie d'accouchement » : choisir, vous avez dit choisir ? J Gynécologie Obstétrique Biol Reprod. 1 juin 2014;43(6):409‑10. 2. Schoorel ENC, Vankan E, Scheepers HCJ, Augustijn BCC, Dirksen CD, Koning M de, et al. Involving women in personalised decision-making on mode of delivery after caesarean section: the development and pilot testing of a patient decision aid. BJOG Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014;121(2):202‑9. 3. Yamamoto SL. Recognizing cesarean delivery on maternal request as a social problem: utilizing the public arenas model. Policy Polit Nurs Pract. août 2011;12(3):168‑74. 4. Burcher P, Gabriel JL, Campo-Engelstein L, Kiley KC. The case against cesarean delivery on maternal request in labor. Obstet Gynecol. sept 2013;122(3):684‑7. 5. Siddique H. One in six NHS trusts do not offer caesareans on request - charity. The Guardian [Internet]. 21 août 2018 [cité 17 mai 2020]; Disponible sur: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/aug/21/one-in-six-nhs-trusts-do-not-offer-maternal-request-caesarians 6. Burrow S. On the cutting edge: ethical responsiveness to cesarean rates. Am J Bioeth AJOB. 2012;12(7):44‑52. 7. Instead of judging women who want a C-section, why not listen? | Rebecca Schiller | Opinion | The Guardian [Internet]. [cité 17 mai 2020]. Disponible sur: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/21/women-c-section-birth-planning-caesarean 8. Kukla R, Kuppermann M, Little M, Lyerly AD, Mitchell LM, Armstrong EM, et al. Finding Autonomy in Birth. Bioethics. janv 2009;23(1):1‑8. 9. E BHN, A B, A BM, S C, R S, N BJ. [Neonatal respiratory morbidity after elective cesarean section at term]. Tunis Med. 1 déc 2010;88(12):924‑7. 10. Plante LA. Public Health Implications of Cesarean on Demand. Obstet Gynecol Surv. déc 2006;61(12):807‑15. 11. Caesarean section on request: a comparison of obstetricians' attitudes in eight European countries - Habiba - 2006 - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology - Wiley Online Library [Internet]. [cité 28 mai 2020]. Disponible sur: https://obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.00933.x 12. Corthésy S. À la recherche d'un accouchement physiologique : revivre la naissance au naturel. 2017.