CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1        Background to the Study

The joy that comes with the birth of a healthy baby is unparalleled by any other achievement in life, especially when the mother avoids the tragedy of labor complications or postpartum illness. Conversely, there is no loss more agonizing than that of a mother during a complicated pregnancy or difficult labor, particularly when it occurs due to the refusal of a cesarean section. Delivery marks a pivotal moment in every woman's life, where certain medical conditions associated with pregnancy and labor may necessitate a cesarean section to safeguard both maternal and infant lives (Lawani et al., 2019; Zamani-Alavijeh et al., 2018).

A cesarean delivery, commonly referred to as C-section, involves the birth of a fetus through an incision in the abdominal wall and uterus after 28 weeks of gestation (Narayanaswamy et al., 2016). It is one of the most frequently performed major abdominal surgeries worldwide, with rates varying significantly between countries and healthcare settings. Most cesarean sections are performed when vaginal birth poses a risk of serious harm to either the mother or child. However, approximately 2.5% of cesarean sections are estimated to occur at the mother's request without medical indication, a rate that has risen over the past decade (Smith, 2018).

Globally, the rate of cesarean sections has doubled over the past 15 years and was reported to be 26.2% (Zakerihamidi et al., 2021; Freeman, 2022). In the United States, nearly 1.3 million women undergo cesarean sections annually, accounting for almost a third of all births (Jones, 2018). Rates in European countries range from 13% to 25%, while in the Caribbean and Latin America, cesarean sections constitute 44% of births, reaching up to 90% in private clinics in Brazil and 70% in northern Iran (Zakerihamidi et al., 2019).

Factors contributing to the high cesarean section rates in Brazil include cultural preferences for scheduled births, perceptions of modern and cleaner delivery methods, and physician pressure, among others (Purzucki, 2018). In contrast, many African countries report cesarean section rates as low as 2–4%, which may contribute to higher maternal and neonatal mortality rates compared to regions with rates between 10% and 19% that are associated with improved outcomes (Ye et al., 2016; Boerma et al., 2018).

In Nigeria, cesarean section rates have increased from 9.4% to 34.6% since the 1970s, with a significant proportion arising from emergency cases among unbooked patients (Ezeome et al., 2018). A study conducted at the University of Benin Teaching Hospital found that while only 6.1% of women were initially willing to consider cesarean section, 81% would accept it if necessary to save their lives or those of their babies, while 12.1% would refuse it under any circumstances (Aziken et al., 2017).

The World Health Organization recommends that cesarean sections be performed in only 10-15% of births worldwide, based on medical necessity, due to the procedure's potential benefits outweighing its risks in certain complications or risk factors (Freeman, 2022; Zakerihamidi et al., 2015). However, in some developing countries, there remains a perception that cesarean sections are primarily due to women's supposed inadequacies or inability to achieve vaginal delivery (Roux, 2020). Recently, cesarean sections have also been viewed as a means to avoid labor pain and as a safer, healthier alternative to vaginal delivery (Zakerihamidi et al., 2022).

Given the prevailing beliefs and perceptions, particularly in the West African sub-region, where there may be an aversion to surgical delivery (Okonkwo et al., 2023; Ezeome et al., 2021), this study seeks to explore the perceptions of pregnant mothers regarding cesarean section as a birthing option at Niger Delta University Teaching Hospital, Okolobiri.

1.2        Statement of Problem

Caesarean section, as a life-saving birthing procedure, has significantly reduced maternal and infant mortality rates worldwide. However, its alarming increase, particularly in developed countries, as such. In the United States, for instance, approximately one in ten childbirths involves a cesarean section, with rates estimated at 26.1% in 2022 (Zakerihamidi et al., 2023). Similarly, Nigeria, as a developing country in West Africa, has seen its cesarean section rates rise from 9.4% to 34.6% between the 1970s and the present, largely due to emergency cases among unbooked patients (Ezeome et al., 2018).

Conversely, in many developing countries, there remains a reluctance to accept cesarean sections, even when they are medically necessary to save the lives of pregnant mothers and babies, such as in cases of obstructed labor. This reluctance is often due to cultural beliefs or concerns about the complications that may arise from surgical interventions, including conditions like vesico-vaginal fistula (VVF), recto-vaginal fistula (RVF), and stress incontinence, which can significantly impact quality of life (Roux, 2020; Okonkwo et al., 2012; Ugwu & Kok, 2018). These factors contribute to increased maternal and neonatal mortality and morbidity rates in such settings (Dare, 2019).

In the researcher's clinical experience at the Antenatal Clinic and Labour ward of Niger Delta University Teaching Hospital (NDUTH), it was observed that many pregnant mothers whose health conditions contraindicate vaginal delivery do not readily opt for cesarean section unless faced with emergency situations. Similarly, women in prolonged labor often resist cesarean delivery, believing in the timing appointed by God for their baby's birth. In light of these observations, the researcher is motivated to investigate 'Pregnant mothers' Perception of Cesarean Section as a Birthing Option at Niger Delta University Teaching Hospital (NDUTH), Okolobiri.' 

1.3    Objectives of the Study

The objectives of this study were specifically:

1)         To assess the perception of pregnant mothers on cesarean section as a method of birth option in Niger Delta University Teaching Hospital, Okolobiri;

2)         To identify the factors influencing mother’s perception on cesarean section as a method of birth option in Niger Delta University Teaching Hospital, Okolobiri; and

3)         To determine  the possible strategies for correcting the negative perception of pregnant mothers on cesarean section as a method of birth option in Niger Delta University Teaching Hospital, Okolobiri.

1.4       Research Questions

The research questions this study seeks to answer are as follows:

1)         What are the perception of pregnant mothers on Caesarean section as a method of birth option in Niger Delta University Teaching Hospital, Okolobiri?

2)         What are the factors influencing mother’s perception on Caesarean section as a method of birth option in Niger Delta University Teaching Hospital, Okolobiri?

3)         What are the possible strategies for correcting the negative perception of pregnant mothers on Caesarean section as a method of birth option in Niger Delta University Teaching Hospital, Okolobiri?

 

 

1.5    Significance of the Study        

This study is paramount in so many ways such that its findings will promote positive perception or correct negative perception toward caesarean section as a method of birth option among pregnant mothers and women of reproductive age. The strategies identified from this study will direct the attention of nursing practitioners and other health personnel on areas to build on and develop during health education, seminars, symposium etc. Also, it will be useful for further research work and increase the body of already existing knowledge in nursing practice.

1.6       Scope of the Study

The scope of this study will focus on perception of pregnant mothers, women of reproductive age (15-45years) on Caesarean section attending Antenatal and Postnatal Clinics in Niger Delta University Teaching Hospital, Okolobiri.

1.7       Operational Definition of Terms

1.      Caesarean Section: This is an intervention carried out in other to ensure both mother and child is safe from harm, it involves delivery of the baby by means of abdominal operation.

2.      Pregnant mothers: A pregnant mother is a woman who is in the state of pregnancy, which is the period during which a fertilized egg develops into a fetus inside her uterus. This stage begins with conception and lasts until childbirth. Pregnancy typically spans around 40 weeks and is divided into three trimesters:

3.      Perception of Pregnant mothers: Personal, cultural and religious views or opinion of pregnant mothers on a particular subject matter.

 

 

 

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter deals with a review of literature for the study. The literature review INCLUD: a review of concept of Caesarean section, theoretical framework, empirical review, application of theory to the study.

2.1       Concept of Caesarean Section

The concept of Cesarean Section (CS) has deep historical roots, reflecting both its evolution and the changing perceptions of its practice. The origins of cesarean section can be traced back to ancient civilizations, where it was performed under rudimentary conditions. Historical texts from ancient Egypt, India, Greece, and Rome mention the procedure. For instance, Hippocratic writings and Pliny the Elder's works reference cesarean sections, though these were often last-resort measures with high mortality rates for both mothers and infants (Smith, 2004). The term "cesarean" is derived from the Latin word "caesus," meaning "cut," and while there is a popular belief linking the procedure to Julius Caesar, historical evidence supporting this claim is lacking (Harris, 1995). During the Middle Ages, cesarean sections were performed infrequently and were generally associated with poor outcomes. This was primarily because the procedure was typically only done when the mother was already deceased or dying (Jones, 1997). The high risk of infection and lack of antiseptic techniques contributed to the procedure's dangerous reputation. Significant progress began in the 17th century with the development of more refined surgical techniques. However, it was not until the 19th century that cesarean sections became considerably safer. The introduction of antiseptics by Sir Joseph Lister in the 1860s greatly reduced infection rates, and advancements in anesthesia further improved safety and comfort during the procedure (Lister, 1864). Surgeons such as Ferdinand de Orellana and William Smellie played key roles in improving surgical methods and maternal care during this period (Smith & Jones, 2000).

The 20th century marked a transformative period for cesarean sections. With the advent of advanced surgical techniques, better anesthesia, and antibiotics, the procedure became more common and safer for both mothers and babies (Williams & Williams, 2001). The introduction of elective cesarean sections allowed for more planned deliveries, driven by various factors including maternal preferences and medical indications (Brown, 2008).

In the 21st century, cesarean sections are a routine part of obstetric care, with a focus on minimizing risks and improving outcomes. Advances in medical technology, including modern imaging techniques and enhanced surgical methods, have further increased the safety of the procedure (Adams & Nelson, 2019). Contemporary research continues to explore the long-term effects of cesarean deliveries on maternal and infant health, aiming to balance the benefits of the procedure with the promotion of vaginal births when feasible (Johnson, 2022).

Caesarean section as defined by Marshall, Raynor, Nolte and Myles (2021) is ‘an operative procedure that is carried out under anesthesia whereby the fetus, placenta and membranes are delivered through an incision in the abdominal wall and the uterus. This is usually carried out after viability has been reached (i.e., 24weeks of gestation onwards).  Also, Saju (2021), defined it as the delivery of a fetus through surgical incisions made through the abdominal wall (laparatomy) and the uterine wall (hysterectomy) or rarely to remove a ‘dead fetus’.

The first modern caesarean section was performed by a German Gynecologist, Ferdinand Adolf in 1881. The procedure was usually performed when a vaginal delivery would put the baby’s or mother’s life at risk, although in recent times, it has been performed upon request for child birth that could otherwise have been natural.

Types of Caesarean Section

1)      Classical Caesarean Section: A mid-line, vertical incision on the abdomen and the uterus is made to deliver the baby owing to a large number of complications associated with the technique, it is hardly practiced any longer.

2)      Lower Segment Caesarean Section (LSC/S): It is the most commonly preferred method wherein a horizontal or transverse pfanensteil/bikini line incision is made on the lower part of the abdomen to deliver the baby. It involves less blood loss, and is easier to repair than other incisions employed for the purpose. It also heals faster (Marshall et al, 2022). The LSC/S can further be graded depending on when it is performed as follows:

(a)   Emergency Caesarean Section (Unplanned C/S): When there is suspected   danger to the mother’s or baby’s condition during pregnancy or labour, an emergency section is resorted to. This can further be sub-classed into two (2):

        i.            Real Emergency C/S: Where immediate action must be taken to deliver the baby for it to survive such as in cord prolapse with fetal compromise.

      ii.            Urgent Emergency C/S: More time can be taken to prepare for the operation and proposed actions can be discussed with the parents in a more relaxed manner. Reasons for urgent emergency C/S are: antepartum hemorrhage, cord prolapse, uterine rupture (dramatic/scar dehiscence), CPD diagnosed in labour, fulminating pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, failure to progress in the first or second stage of labour and fetal compromise if delivery is not imminent.

(b)   Elective Caesarean Section (Planned Caesarean Section): This is a planned caesarean section and done on a specific date chosen by the patient and the gynecologist after assessing the maturity of the baby and conditions warranting the C/S. The decision for the surgery to be elective must be taken prior to labour commencement i.e., during pregnancy. Elective C/S are further grouped into two sub-categories for clarity sake such as:

                    i.            Booked Elective C/S: These are truly elective C/S that are booked around term at a time convenient for mother and surgeon while

                  ii.            Scheduled C/S: In this case, early delivery is required, but there is no immediate compromise to mother or foetus (Marshall et al, 2022).

According to Marshall et al (2021), definite indications for elective C/S are: cephalo-pelvic disproportion (CPD), major degree of placenta praevia, high order multiple pregnancy while possible indications are: breech presentation, moderate to severe pre-eclampsia, a medical condition that warrants the exclusion of maternal effort, diabetes mellitus, intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR), antepartum hemorrhage and certain fetal abnormalities such as hydrocephalus.

3)      Caesarean Hysterectomy: It is a life-saving procedure in which the uterus is removed after delivering the baby through a caesarean section. It is performed when bleeding cannot be controlled or when the placenta adheres to the uterine wall and it is not possible to separate it.

Indications for Caesarean Section

A Caesarean delivery is performed for maternal indication or fetal indications or both. The leading indications for caesarean delivery are breech presentation, an elective or indicated repeat caesarean section, fetal distress, previous caesarean section and placenta abnormalities. These indications are responsible for 85% of all caesarean deliveries (Saju, 2021).

Maternal Indications: These include –

        i.            Obstructive lesions in the lower genital tract, including malignancies, obstructive vagina septa, large vulvo vagina condylomas.

      ii.            Relative maternal indications include conditions in which the increase intrathoracic pressure generated by valsalva maneuver could lead to maternal complications, which include – dilated aortic valve root, and recent retinal detachment.

    iii.            Pelvic abnormalities that preclude engagement or interfere with descent of the fetal presentation in labour.

Fetal Indications

                       i.            Twin gestation: The first twin in a non-vertex presentation is an indication for caesarean delivery, as are higher order multiples (triplets or more).

                     ii.            Congenital anomalies: Caesarean delivery is an indication for several congenital anomalies such as fetal neural tube defects (to avoid sac rupture) and hydrocephalus with an enlarged bi-parental diameter.

                   iii.            Maternal infections: Among patients with first episode genital herpes infection, the risk of maternal fetal transmission is 33 times higher than with recurrent outbreaks.

                   iv.            Fetal Distress: This is the most common fetal indication for caesarean section. It is recommended to prevent a mixed or metabolic acidaemia that could potentially cause significant morbidity and mortality.

According to Smith (2018), a Caesarean might also occur by maternal choice. A person might choose Caesarean delivery on maternal request (CDMR) for a complex range of reasons, according to a 2017 study, such as: a fear of pain during childbirth or anxiety about vaginal delivery; previous experience; interactions with healthcare professionals; a range of social influences, including the media, friends, and family; and a feeling of control over the birthing process.

Risks for Caesarean Section as a method of birth option

Risk for Mother: The mortality rate for both caesarean section and vaginal birth in the Western world continues to drop steadily in 2000. The mortality rates of caesarean section in the United State were 20 per 1,000,000, that is 20 deaths in every 1,000,000 caesarean sections (Pia, 2020).

Women with severe medical conditions or higher-risk pregnancies often require a caesarean section which can distort the mortality figures. As with all abdominal surgery, a caesarean section is associated with risk of post-operative adhesions, wound infection and incisional hernia, blood loss, blood clot, injury to associated organs such as bladder, bowel; adverse reactions to medications and anesthetic agents, potential complications during future pregnancies, endometritis (Pia, 2020; Smith, 2018).   

Risk for Fetus: These risk include -

                          i.            Fetal Injury: Injury may occur during uterine incision and extraction.

                        ii.            Premature Birth: If gestational age was not calculated correctly, a baby delivered by caesarean section could be delivered too early and have low birth weight.

                      iii.            Breathing problems: When delivered by caesarean section, a baby is more likely to have breathing and respiratory problems such as transient tachypnea or respiratory distress syndrome. Some studies show the existence of greater need for assistance with breathing and immediate care after a caesarean delivery than with a vaginal delivery.

                      iv.            Low Apgar Score: Babies may have an adverse reaction to the anesthesia given to the mother causing a period of inactivity or sluggishness after delivery (Christensen, 2020; Smith, 2018).

Perception of Women about Caesarean Section as a method of birth option

The trend of acceptability and the rate of C/S have been on the increase in the developed countries and less remarkable in developing countries. This variation has a relationship with the diverse perceptions (positive and negative) of women about Caesarean Section as a method of birth option irrespective of  the justifiable medical and non-medical indications (Zamani-Alavijeh et al, 2018).In some developing countries ,C/S is still being perceived as an abnormal means of delivery by some women. It is also perceived as a curse for an unfaithful and weak woman i.e., incompetent in childbirth, hence shy away from talking about it when they have one. The C/S scar is also perceived as a badge of dishonor (Zamani-Alavijeh et al, 2018; Smith, 2018). It was also reported in a study conducted among Yoruba women in Southwestern part of Nigeria that C/S was perceived with suspicion, aversion, misconception, fear, guilt, misery and anger. In respect to the above negative perceptions, elective   C/S of non-medical indications is not an issue to mention or rarely undertaken by few while it is unwillingly accepted when it is indicated by a medical reason. In Zamani-Alavijeh et al (2018) study, its acceptance was as a result of being worried about baby’s health and change in genital tract.  This was also found in a reviewed study by Okonkwo et al (2022), that following a successful live birth, the majority (85.2%) said they would like to experience vaginal delivery in their next pregnancy in order to feel like “a real woman”, further confirming the already known preference for vaginal delivery by African women. This study showed that the belief that Caesarean section is the way to ensure a live birth was a critical factor in making the choice for Caesarean section owing to prolonged infertility, repeated pregnancy losses, and advanced maternal age at first pregnancy were common reasons.

Factors that Influence Women Perceptions about Caesarean Section as a method of birth option

As noted by Zakerihamidi, (2018), it is difficult to pinpoint an exact cause for the rising rates of Caesarean sections. Medical, Institutional, legal, psychological, religious, cultural and sociodemographic factors play a contributing role in women perceptions about Caesarean section reflecting in its increase or low incidence.

Medical Factors/ Maternal Request: Elective Caesarean sections are increasingly being performed for a variety of reasons including concern for pelvic floor injury associated with vaginal birth, medically indicated preterm birth and patient request (Narayanaswamy et al, 2016). As noted in the findings from the study of Partnership for Women and Families (2019), despite much media and professional attention to “maternal request” Caesareans, only 1% of respondents who had a planned initial, or “primary,” Caesarean did so with the understanding that there was no medical reason as against a study review of Dusabe et al (2018), where 77% of the respondents had a medical indication. About one mother in five (22%) reported asking their providers to schedule a Caesarean before labor, and 87% of those did so believing that it would offer a health benefit to them or their babies, leaving about 2% overall who asked the provider to schedule a Caesarean with no medical reason contradicting International Federation of Obstetrics and gynecologists who stressed that conducting C-section without a medical reason is not moral (Zamani-Alavijeh   et al,  2018).

Institutional Factor

Increased supply of C/S delivery by healthcare institutions without restrictions from maternal demand with non-medical indication(s) is an implicated factor owing to  the fact that it is an important source of revenue for hospitals and health-care providers (WHO, 2021)  resulting to a high C/S rate recorded in private clinic C/S (Jones, 2018). As reported   in a survey by National Partnership for Women and Families (2019), many women report experiencing pressure from a care provider to have a Caesarean. Overall, 13% of pregnant mothers reported experiencing pressure from a care provider to have a Caesarean. However, this rose to 22% among women who had a repeat Caesarean section, and 28% among both pregnant mothers who had a primary Caesarean and those who had a vaginal birth after Caesarean.

More so, it was noted by National Partnership for Women and Families (2019) that discussion about giving birth after one or two prior Caesarean steers many women toward repeat Caesarean, even though research and professional guidelines support offering vaginal birth to nearly all such women (Fraser et al, 2018). 

Unfortunately, in most developing countries, limited access to the service and health systems inadequacies are responsible for its low C/S rate. More so, according to National Partnership for Women and Families (2019), a significant proportion of Caesarean section may be related to lack of access to vaginal birth after Caesarean (VBAC).  It was reported that in a study that out of women with a previous Caesarean, almost half (48%) were interested in the option of a VBAC, but 46% were denied that option, out of which 24% denied was due to unwillingness of the provider while 15% was that the hospital did not allow VBAC/S.

Women who have had one birth by caesarean section usually give birth the same way to reduce the risk of uterine rupture; however, a number of studies, show that vaginal births to women with previous C/S   is possible (Dusabe et al, 2018).  

Interventions in labor are closely linked with having unplanned Caesarean as it was observed that among first-time pregnant mothers with term births who experienced labour, those who had both labour induction and epidural analgesia were six times as likely to have a Caesarean section (31%) as those who had neither intervention (5%) (National Partnership for Women and Families, 2019).

Legal: One of the main goals of every medical team, dealing with childbirth, is performing a safe delivery. Fear of litigation regarding whatever loss resulting from denied maternal C/S request is a perpetuating factor (WHO, 2021).

 

Psychological Factor

Fear of vaginal delivery consequences increase demand by women requesting a caesarean section especially, when having one child is the norm, rich and well educated women because they think it is safer and free from pain and anxiety (WHO, 2021).  According to Zakarihamidi et al (2016), the attitude towards labor pain can be determinant of women’s decisions about mode of delivery and culture has a significant impact on people’s perceptions and attitudes towards labor pain, definition of labor pain, coping mechanisms against pain, and related behaviors.

Sociodemographic Factors

Social factors such as wealth status, education and women on health insurance are implicated in increase maternal request for C/S with educational factor most implicated However, the above first three factors explanation as a cause of the increase in C/S rate cannot be made (WHO, 2021). Unfortunately, according to Ugwu & Kok (2019), there is great inequity in access to C/S based on economic capacity; in Nigeria rates drop below 1% for the poorest 80% of the population.

Parity and Geographical Factor: In a study embarked on by World Health Organization (WHO) (2021), it was reported that C/S rate between 2002  and 2023, among primiparous women living in cities in China rose from 18% to 39% while rural China it is estimated to be above 25% with its slow pace of increase More so, about two-third of urban women now give birth by caesarean section.

Okonkwo et al (2021) noted that in developed countries, while fear of birth, increasing maternal age at marriage and first pregnancy, fear of pelvic floor damage, and genital prolapse in later years are implicated reasons, in developing countries, the view that Caesarean section is the surest way to a live birth is believed to be a critical factor underlying their choice. Also, Dusabe et al (2018) reported that maternal age (older women) has also been associated with increased co-morbidities and increased perceived need for Caesarean section delivery.

 

Strategies for correcting the negative perception of women on Caesarean section as a method of birth option

The availability and provision of Emergency Obstetric Care (EmOC) either basic or comprehensive in nature is one of the most paramount requirements of maternal mortality reduction programs and at the long run the attainment of one of the components of the Sustainable Development goals. C/S is a comprehensive EmOC which has been reported to be universally accessible and available (Ugwu & Kok, 2018).

Availability of social support system is paramount to the woman in labour as noted in Zamani-Alavijeh et al (2018), research where it was shown that private social support was about 87.2% among women and the women stated that presence of doctors, midwife, could lead to the reduction of fear of NVD.

Furthermore, Copelli et al (2018) opined that, Fear of being unable to bear the pain, of dying, of being dilacerated, as well as the feeling of not being able to give birth predispose women in labour to medical conditions. Therefore, provision of physical, psychological, and educational support to women in labour are encouragement factors to them. Emotional support such as having the participation of fathers and/or companions during the process of parturition enhances a natural childbirth, free of interventions. Another strategy to give support to women and their families at this time is to have the assistance of an obstetric nurse in the process, with the aim of understanding the emotions of those involved, conveying confidence, encouraging women, and showing them that they are able to endure painful sensations during labor, therefore ensuring lower rates of Caesarean sections. In addition to the aspects related to emotional support, nurses can use non-pharmacological methods of pain relief, such as the use of the Swiss ball, a therapeutic bath, and massage, among others. This intervention helps to increase their knowledge about this moment, thereby reducing external influences that could lead to a birth with intervention.

According to Ugwu & Kok (2019), there is need to find means of facilitating necessary C/S by addressing the prevailing socio-cultural norms and expectations that hinder its acceptance. Engaging and guiding alternative providers (traditional birth attendants and faith healers) who wield much power in their communities, will be important to minimize delays and improve cultural acceptability of C/S.

2.2       Theoretical Review 

This research study adopted a Health Belief Model (Motivational theory) proposed by Rosenstock in the 1950s. The model (HBM) was modified in 1974 to include these components: individual perceptions, modifying factors and variables likely to affect initiating action.

Rosenstock (1979) assumed that good health is an objective common to all people. Becker added “positive health motivation” as consideration. HBM is among the various behavioural models designed to explain the process of behavior change and the interaction among these factors. The use of such models is useful to ensure completeness of messages and the possible outcomes. The model included these constructs:

·         Perceived threat (whether the danger imposed by not undertaking a certain health action recommended is great).

·         Perceived susceptibility (an individual’s assessment of their risk of getting the condition).

·         Perceived severity (an individual’s assessment of the seriousness of the condition, and its potential consequences).

·         Perceived barriers (an individual’s assessment of the influences that facilitate or discourage adoption of the promoted behavior).

·      Perceived benefits (an individual’s assessment of the positive consequences of adopting the behavior).

·      Demographic variables (Such as age, gender, ethnicity, occupation).

·      Perceived efficacy (an individual’s self-assessment of ability to successfully adopt the desired behaviour).

·      Cues to action (external influences promoting the desired behavior, may include information provided or sought, reminders by powerful others, persuasive communications, and personal experiences).

The prediction of the model is the likelihood of the individual concerned to undertake recommended health action such as preventive and curative health action.

Application of the Model to the study

The model involves the knowledge and perception regarding caesarean section and its importance. Demographic variables are those that influence women decision making, which include maternal age, parity, religion, education level, knowledge and perception.

Perceived benefits; when a woman perceived that benefits of caesarean section outweighs side effect; she will consent to it. Perceived susceptibility; a woman during antenatal when told of caesarean section and she is knowledgeable about her condition, she will assess herself and take action. Perceived threat; when a woman perceives her condition as serious and there is danger if she does not take action, she will take action to prevent such. Perceived seriousness; a woman in labour when informed of caesarean section may not accept the procedure depending on her condition and this may lead to complication or death. On the other hand, perceived seriousness of the condition will prompt immediate and timely consent to C/S to avoid complications.  Perceived barriers; if a woman assesses the influence that may hinder her from taking action, and the benefits of the action outweigh the influence, she will take action. Cues to action may include: knowledge from the hospital, media, personal experience and others. Perceived efficacy; this enables her to consent to C/S procedure base on her knowledge about good prognosis.

 

2.3       Empirical Review

In a cross-sectional study carried out by Lawani et al (2019), on ‘Perception and Socio-cultural Barriers to the Acceptance of Caesarean Delivery in A Tertiary Hospital in Abakaliki (FETHA), South East Nigeria,’ 344 patient at FETHA were utilized as the sample from October 1 to November 30, 2016 and data were using a self-administered questionnaire, analyzed using SPSS version 20.0. The findings revealed that respondents’ awareness on C/S as an operative abdominal procedure for delivery was 100%; of these, 14.0% had experienced the procedure previously; 82.3% that had a previous C/S were well informed about the indications. About 20.3% did not accept C/S for any reasons. The major barriers to acceptance were being considered way peers as a reproductive failure (29.2%), high cost (20.8%) and religious beliefs (12.5%).

In a case-control study by Dusabe et al (2018), ‘factors associated with caesarean sections at health facilities in Kabarole District, Western Uganda’ were examined among 134 women that had a caesarean section and 134 controls that had a “normal” vaginal delivery  during March to May 2016, using  a two-stage sampling technique, three public health facilities and two randomly selected private facilities. The factors associated with caesarean section delivery were: having a previous caesarean section delivery, attendance of four or more ANC visits. Inadequate human resource, medicines and supplies affected access to the service. Misconceptions such as negative branding of women that have caesarean section deliveries as “lazy” reduced its acceptance thus low utilization of the service.

In a mixed method study by Ugwu and Kok (2019) on ‘Socio-cultural factors, gender roles and religious ideologies contributing to Caesarian-section refusal in Nigeria’, a Semi-structured interviews, focus group discussions (FGD) and informal observations were their sources of data on the qualitative end. It was reported that, 2 % of maternity clients refused C/S and more than 90% of the C/S in the focal hospital were emergencies which may indicate late arrival at the hospital after seeking assistance elsewhere. The qualitative analysis reveals that socio-cultural meanings informed by gender and religious ideologies, the relational consequences of having a C-section, and the role of alternative providers are some key factors which influence when, where and whether women will accept C-section or not.

Also in a survey carried out using a qualitative, exploratory, descriptive, documentary, and retrospective research study by Copelli et al., (2019), on ‘Determinants of women's preference for Caesarean section’ a thematic method of data analysis was employed on the database extension project Group of Pregnant Women and Pregnant Couples by the Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (1996-2013). The findings revealed that out of the 169 (37.72%) postpartum women who had undergone a Caesarean section, 16 chose the procedure. It was found that, in this group, the choice for Caesarean section during prenatal care was influenced by the medical authority and, during labor, it was motivated by the prolonged duration and the pain caused by contractions. 70% of the C/S occur in the private and 64% of it were planned and the decision was their own choice or together with the prenatal doctor. Also, most of the live births in Brazil (53.74%) and Santa Catarina (58.88%) involved surgery and the relationship between preference for Caesarean section and higher social and economic status, higher education and economic level were implicated.  It was found that 66% of the women preferred a natural childbirth. The culture of Caesarean section in Brazil shows that, although women prefer natural childbirth regardless of their social profile, most end up choosing Caesarean section, whether during prenatal care or labor. The preference for Caesarean section during labor was mainly motivated by the fear of pain caused by contractions and the prolonged duration of this period.

In a descriptive review conducted  by  Sunday-Adeoye and Kalu (2021) on ‘Pregnant Nigerian women's view of Caesarean section at Ebonyi State University Teaching Hospital Abakaliki (EBSUTH), available hospital records of 2005 and 2006 were reviewed and it was found that C/S rate for the 2 years was 16.6%.  A structured, 4-point Likert Scale questionnaire was administered to 300 consenting pregnant clients attending the antenatal clinic between September and November, 2021. The analyzed data using EPI INFO 3.3.2 software findings include: 9.4% have had a previous history of C/S, 78.3% had delivered at least once by the vaginal route and 12.3% were nulliparous. 76.9% of the respondents who had C/S were favorably received at home following the C/S as against 23.1%. Regarding their current pregnancy, 81.2% of the women viewed C/S as good if their life or that of their baby was in great danger; 1.4% as very good and elected to undergo C/S to avoid the pains and complications of labor and delivery; 12.3% said it is bad and would only reluctantly undergo the procedure if the doctors thought it was necessary to save their lives or their baby. Only 1.1% viewed C/S as being very bad and will not accept the procedure in any circumstance. Majority of the study population, 82.7% would recommend the procedure for their daughters or daughters-in-law if their lives and or that of the baby were in great danger. 66.1% and 34% of the study population indicated that the cultural perception of their people about C/S is that it is a normal obstetric decision and was negative respectively being perceived as a procedure done by unfaithful and cursed women as well as women who were weaklings. Also, majority of the respondents 43% were afraid of death as a complication of C/S, 29.2% did not have any fear about C/S, while 19.9% were afraid of the postoperative pain associated with C/S.

A cross-sectional survey carried out by Okonkwo et al (2022) on ‘Maternal demand for Caesarean section: perception and willingness to request by Nigerian antenatal clients’ among 843 antenatal clients at Agbongbon/Orayan primary health care centers (PHC/S), Adeoyo Maternity Hospital (SHC), and UCH Ibadan (THC), representing the three different levels of health care in Nigeria, women awareness on MDC/S was 39.6%. Predictors of awareness were education and type of health facility. Women from THC and those with tertiary education and above were more likely to be aware of MDC/S than others. Doctors were major sources of information on MDC/S (30.8%) as well as friends (24.3%). Common reasons reported for MDC/S were fear of labor pains (68.9%), and fear of poor labor outcome (60.1%), and fear of fecal (20.2%) and urinary incontinence (16.8%). More women from the THC than other facilities believed that requests for MDC/S should be granted. However, willingness to request MDC/S was low (6.6%). More than 50% of those willing to request MDC/S would likely be criticized, mainly by their husbands.

2.4       Summary of Literature Reviewed

The reviewed literature in this study was done on the concepts of caesarean section as a method of birth option. theoretical framework and its applications including empirical studies. The adopted theoretical framework was Health Belief Model by Rosenstock (1979). It was discovered in the literature reviewed that a lot of study have been carried out on Caesarean sections assessing attitude, its influencing factors, comparative study of C/S with vaginal delivery, perceptions in different places including Nigeria. However, published articles or journals in South-South are few or lacking. Also, general perceptions on C/S had been researched on but perceptions on the measures to reduce its trending rate or adjustment means to bring the rate to standard in developing countries is lacking. Hence, necessitating this study.


 

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

The methodology employed in gathering necessary information in regard to the problem under study is as follows:

3.1    Research Design

A descriptive research design will be adopted in this study. This is because it does not enable the researcher to willfully manipulate the variables, but rather a systematic collection and presentation of data obtained from respondents.  Therefore, it helps to elicit information on perception of pregnant mothers on Caesarean section as a method of birth option in Niger Delta University Teaching Hospital (NDUTH), Okolobiri.

3.2       Research Setting

The study is carried out in Niger Delta University Teaching Hospital (NDUTH) Okolobiri.  NDUTH Okolobiri is located in the region of Bayelsa. Bayelsa's capital Yenagoa (Yenagoa) is approximately 14.9 km / 9.3 mi away from Okolobiri. The Hospital was established in 1982 as general hospital. It was upgraded to  became a Teaching hospital in September  2007. Niger Delta University Teaching Hospital (NDUTH) Okolobiri was established by the Bayelsa State Government under the Bayelsa State Law. The hospital was officially established through the Bayelsa State Law No. 2 of 2013, which was enacted to provide healthcare services, training, and research in the medical field within the region. Niger Delta University Teaching Hospital (NDUTH) Okolobiri is surrounded by several neighboring communities. To the southeast of Okolobiri lies Obunagha, while Nedogo is situated to the southwest. Tombia Town is located to the west of Okolobiri, offering a neighboring settlement with its own distinct characteristics. Ogboloma can be found to the northwest, while Igbogene is positioned to the north of Okolobiri. Each of these communities contributes to the regional network around NDUTH Okolobiri, reflecting a diverse and interconnected local landscape. NDUTH is made up of 20 blocks which are representations of the twelve units/departments including nurses, doctors, pharmacists, medical laboratory scientist, paramedical workers and other non-medical workers. It is one of the biggest teaching hospital in the south-south regions of Nigeria with about 200-bed spaces. The staff strength is about 500. The departments and units studied were those ones that handle biohazards, namely; intensive care unit, theater, wards, laboratories, casualty, outpatient departments, and blood bank. It consist of nine (9) wards. It is accessible by road either through Igbogene or Nigeria liquefied Natural Gas (NLNG) Obunagha road. The NDUTH Okolobiri is been chosen by the researcher as the area of study due to the fact that it is a major tertiary hospital and is visited by most people within and outside the state for their health care.

 

3.3    Target Population

The target population is the group of individuals that the intervention intends to conduct research in and draw conclusion from. It is a portion of the whole universe of people selected as the subject audience. The population for study will be a total of 224 females conveniently selected, which comprises of all expectant pregnant mothers (15-45years) attending Antenatal Clinic from the month of January to June, 2024.

3.4    Sample Size

From the above population of study (224), using Taro Yamene’s formula the sample size calculation is shown below:

Taro Yamane’s Formula:

Where: n = Sample size

   N = Finite population

   r =Taro’s constant (0.05)

e = Sampling error

Substituting the values,

                           = 143.58≈ 144.

10% attrition of 144 = 14.

n = 144 +14 = 158.

Therefore, the sample size was158Expectant Pregnant mothers attending Antenatal Clinic of NDUTH, Okolobiri.

3.5    Sampling Technique

Purposive Convenience sampling techniquee will be used for this study, to select subjects that are readily available and accessible for the research based on the expectation that participant will provide information of value for the study.

3.6       Inclusion Criteria

The inclusion criteria of the respondents comprised of:

§  All expectant pregnant mothers attending Antenatal Clinic in NDUTH, Okolobiri irrespective of other sociodemographic variables such as educational qualification, occupation, marital status etc.

§  All expectant pregnant mothers who are available and willing to participate in the study.

3.7    Instrument for Data Collection

A ‘self-structured questionnaire’ developed by the researcher on ‘perception of pregnant mothers on Caesarean Section’ will be utilized for data collection. The questionnaire consists of four sections. Section ‘A’ entails sociodemographic data of the respondents while section ‘B, C and D’ elicited data that answer the research questions accordingly and are presented in 5-point Likert Scale form with ‘Strongly Agree (SA), Agree (A), Undecided (U), Strong Disagree (SD) and Disagree (D)’ options.

3.8    Validity of the Instrument

The face and content validity of the instrument will be ascertained by sending copies of questionnaire to the researcher’s supervisor and two other lecturers in the field of study of Faculty of Nursing Sciences. Corrections made will be considered andeffected by the researcher where necessary to prevent ambiguity of the instrument prior to its administration. 

 

3.9    Reliability of the Instrument

A test-retest study will be carried out using 10% of the sample size (i.e, 16 respondents) to evaluate the clarity, and applicability of the tools. The reliability test was conducted in General Hospital, Amassoma. The interval between the two tests was a month. The reliability coefficient was ascertained using Pearson Product-Moment Correlation and considered reliable as it takes a positive value of +0.80.

3.10  Procedure for Data Collection

The instrument will be administered by the researcher to the respondents during Antenatal Clinic days and they will be retrieved immediately after their completion. The same instrument will be interpreted by the researcher in either Pidgin or ‘Izon’ verbally to the non-educated respondents. The data collection will be carried out during Clinic hours while the respondents’ area waiting to be seen by their Physicians after health talks. The administration will be done in all clinic days (i.e. Monday to Friday with the exception of Wednesday) within 2weeks that is eight (8) clinic days.

3.11  Method of Data Analysis

The data will be analyzed manually using frequencies and percentages in frequency distribution tables, pie chart and bar chart. The 5-point Likert scale questions will be analyzed with a scoring system of 5 to 1 for strongly agree, disagree, undecided, strongly disagree and disagree respectively. A mean score ≥3.0 represents acceptance while a score < 3 represents rejection of the phenomenon in view. The data analysis and presentation will be in accordance with the research questions.

 

 

3.12     Ethical Considerations

An introductory letter will be obtained from the Dean of Faculty of Nursing Sciences, Niger Delta University, Amassoma and would be presented to the research and ethical committee, NDUTH Okolobiri  to obtain permit for the conduct. More so, pre-information necessary for participation of the respondents will be made known to them and that the study methodology will be safe with no harm to gain their consent.  Also, they will be made to understand that participation is voluntary and freedom for withdrawal from participation at any time was assured. All information provided were treated with dignity, privacy and confidentiality. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REFERENCES

 

Aziken, M. E., Omo-Aghoja, L. O., & Okonofua, F. E. (2017). Knowledge and perception of       emergency contraception among female Nigerian undergraduates. International Family            Planning Perspectives, 33(2), 84-88.

Boerma, T., Ronsmans, C., Melesse, D. Y., Barros, A. J., Barros, F. C., Juan, L., & Temmerman, M. (2018). Global epidemiology of use of and disparities in caesarean sections. The     Lancet, 392(10155), 1341-1348.

Dare, F. O. (2019). Vesico-vaginal fistula in Nigeria. International Journal of Gynecology &         Obstetrics, 21(4), 347-350.

 

Dusabe, R., Uwimana, J., & Ngendahayo, L. (2018). Factors associated with high cesarean           delivery rates in Rwanda: Analysis of Rwanda Demographic and Health Survey.     International Journal of Health Sciences, 12(2), 10-17.

 

Ezeome, I. V., Udealor, P. C., Chukwuma, S. E., & Iloghalu, E. I. (2018). Trends and       determinants of cesarean section at a teaching hospital in Southeast Nigeria: A six-year          retrospective study. Nigerian Journal of Medicine, 27(1), 33-38.

 

Freeman, R. K. (2022). Global epidemiology of use of and disparities in caesarean sections. The   Lancet, 392(10155), 1341-1348.

 

Jones, L. (2018). Caesarean section rates continue to rise, posing challenges. American Journal     of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 219(3), 289-290.

 

Lawani, O. L., Eze, J. N., & Anozie, O. B. (2019). Obstetric variables and outcome of      emergency caesarean section in a Nigerian tertiary hospital. Journal of Women's Health    Care, 3(5), 1-5.

 

Narayanaswamy, M., Nazim, A., & Sundararajan, R. (2016). Attitudes of women toward mode   of delivery at a rural tertiary care hospital in South India. The Journal of Obstetrics and      Gynecology of India, 66(4), 290-294.

 

Narayanaswamy, M., Nazim, A., & Sundararajan, R. (2019). Evaluating the role of patient            education in caesarean section rates: A rural tertiary care perspective. Indian Journal of Public Health Research & Development, 10(8), 256-259.

 

National Partnership for Women and Families. (2019). Trends in cesarean delivery and vaginal     birth after cesarean, United States, 2019.

 

Okonkwo, N. S., Ezeonu, P. O., & Ugwu, E. O. (2012). Knowledge and attitude of expectant     pregnant mothers to caesarean section in a developing country. Nigerian Journal of Clinical   Practice, 15(3), 308-311.

 

Okonkwo, N. S., Ezeonu, P. O., & Ugwu, E. O. (2023). Understanding the aversion to cesarean   sections in West Africa: A survey of maternal attitudes. African Journal of Reproductive     Health, 27(1), 33-42.

 

Purzucki, A. (2018). The rise of cesarean deliveries in Brazil: A cultural perspective.          International Journal of Childbirth, 8(1), 45-51.

 

Roux, G. (2020). Cultural perspectives on cesarean section rates: A comparative study. Journal     of International Women's Studies, 21(6), 112-126.

 

Smith, J. (2018). Elective cesarean section: Trends and outcomes. Journal of Obstetric,      Gynecologic & Neonatal Nursing, 47(2), 135-142.

 

Ugwu, E. O., & Kok, A. O. (2018). Maternal and neonatal outcomes of elective cesarean delivery in a Nigerian teaching hospital. Nigerian Medical Journal, 59(3), 103-107.

 

Ye, J., Zhang, J., Mikolajczyk, R., Torloni, M. R., Gülmezoglu, A. M., & Betrán, A. P. (2016).     Association between rates of cesarean section and maternal and neonatal mortality in the          21st century: A worldwide population-based ecological study with longitudinal data.    BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 123(5), 745-753.

Zakerihamidi, M., Roudsari, R. L., & Khoei, E. M. (2015). Vaginal delivery vs. cesarean section: A focused ethnographic study of childbirth fear in Iran. Iranian Journal of Nursing and           Midwifery Research, 20(11), 514-520.

Zakerihamidi, M., Roudsari, R. L., & Khoei, E. M. (2019). The relationship between         socioeconomic status and cesarean section: An observational study. Journal of Obstetrics        and Gynaecology, 39(2), 185-192.

Zakerihamidi, M., Roudsari, R. L., & Khoei, E. M. (2021). Global trends in cesarean section         rates: Policy and practice implications. International Journal of Health Policy and      Management, 10(4), 1-8.

Zakerihamidi, M., Roudsari, R. L., & Khoei, E. M. (2022). Women’s perspectives on cesarean      section: A qualitative study from a developing country. Journal of Reproductive Health,        16(4), 24-30.

 

Zakerihamidi, M., Roudsari, R. L., & Khoei, E. M. (2023). The impact of educational        interventions on cesarean section rates: A systematic review. BMC Pregnancy and      Childbirth, 23(1), 67-75.

Zamani-Alavijeh, F., Solhi, M., & Shojaeizadeh, D. (2018). Factors affecting cesarean section       preference among pregnant women: A theory of planned behavior perspective. Journal of       Pregnancy and Child Health, 5(1), 361-367.

Ajeet, S., Jaydeep, N.,  Nandkishore, K. & Nisha, R. (2021), Women’s Knowledge, Perceptions, and Potential Demand towards Caesarean Section.   National Journal of Community Medicine, 2(2) 244-248. Retrieved from: http://www.njcmindia.org/uploads/2-2_244-248.pdf, July 14th, 2019.

Amjad, A., Amjad, U., Zakar, R., Usman, A., Zakar, M. Z.  &Fischer, F. (2018), Factors associated with caesarean deliveries among child-bearing women in Pakistan: secondary analysis of data from the Demographic and Health Survey, 2012–13; BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 18:113. Retrieved from: https://bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1, July 14th, 2019.

Aziken, M., Okonofua, F. &  Omo-Aghoja, L. (2017), Perceptions and attitudes of pregnant women towards Caesarean section in urban Nigeria, Acta Obstetricia Et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 86(1):42-7·  doi: 10.1080/00016340600994950. Retrieved from:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6572976, July 16th, 2019.

Christensen, F. (2020). Low Apgar score: Causes and consequences. Journal of Neonatal Medicine, 12(3), 187-195.

Dusabe, S., Ndung'u, F., & Irakoze, C. (2018). Vaginal births after caesarean sections: Trends      and outcomes. African Journal of Reproductive Health, 22(4), 72-79.

Fraser, W. D., Turcot, L., Krauss, I., & Brisson-Carroll, G. (2018). Maternal request for     caesarean section: A trend analysis. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology,         125(10), 1215-1222.

Jones, C. (2018). Institutional factors influencing caesarean section rates in private clinics.             Global Health Perspectives, 15(2), 97-104.

Marshall, J., Raynor, M., Nolte, A., & Myles, M. (2021). Caesarean section: Definitions, types,     and indications. Obstetrics and Gynecology International, 29(3), 253-271.

Marshall, J., Raynor, M., Nolte, A., & Myles, M. (2022). Lower segment caesarean section:           Techniques and outcomes. Obstetrics and Gynecology International, 30(1), 12-29.

Narayanaswamy, M., Murthy, S., & Venkatesh, S. (2016). Elective caesarean sections: Rising       trends and associated factors. Journal of Women's Health, 11(2), 135-144.

Okonkwo, O. N., Lawal, S. O., & Ugochukwu, E. O. (2021). Perceptions and preferences of        caesarean section among Nigerian women. African Journal of Reproductive Health,    25(1), 50-60.

Pia, M. (2020). Maternal mortality rates and caesarean sections: A global overview.           International Journal of Women's Health, 7(2), 110-123.

Pia, M. (2020). Post-operative complications in caesarean section patients. International Journal   of Women's Health, 17(4), 212-229.

Saju, M. (2021). Surgical procedures in obstetrics: Caesarean sections. Clinical Obstetrics and       Gynecology, 23(2), 102-115.

Smith, R. (2018). The role of maternal request in caesarean deliveries. Journal of Obstetric            Medicine, 21(3), 144-150.

Ugwu, E. O., & Kok, M. A. (2019). Socioeconomic disparities in access to caesarean section in    Nigeria. Journal of Global Health, 5(3), 58-72.

World Health Organization (WHO). (2021). Trends in caesarean section rates: A global     perspective. WHO Global Report, 2021, 1-45.

Zakerihamidi, M., Roudsari, R. L., & Khoei, E. M. (2018). Factors influencing caesarean section: A review of studies. Journal of Maternal and Child Health, 6(2), 87-98.

Zamani-Alavijeh, F., Niknami, S., Mohammadi, E., Montazeri, A., Ahmadi, F., & Ghofranipour, F. (2018). Women's perceptions of caesarean section: A qualitative study. Reproductive         Health, 15(1), 32-45.

Boerma, T., Ronsmans, C. & Melesse, D.Y et al, (2018), Global epidemiology of use of and disparities in caesarean sections, Lancet. 2018; 3921341-1348. Retrieved from: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140., July 20th, 2019.

Dare, A.J. (2019), Making Caesarean Section Safer for African Pregnant mothers. The Lancet Global Health, 7(4); doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(19)30054-3, Elsevier Ltd. Retrieved from: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214, July 20th, 2019.

Dusabe,J., Akuze,J.,   Kisakye, A.N.,  Kwesiga,B., Nsubuga,P. &  Ekirapa, E. (2018), A case-control study of factors associated with caesarean sections at health facilities in Kabarole District, Western Uganda, The Pan African Medical Journal, 29:179.doi:10.11604/pamj.2018.29.179.14870.Retrieved from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/, July 19th, 2019.

Ezeoma I.V, Ezugworie J.O, Udealor, P.C. (2018), Beliefs, Perceptions and views of pregnant women about Caesarean section and reproductive decision-making in a specialist health facility in Enugu, South-East Nigeria. Niger J. Clin Pract, 21:423-8. Retrieved from: http://www.njcponline.com/text/asp?,  July 18th, 2019.

Ezeome I V, Ezugworie J O, Udealor P C. (2018), Beliefs, perceptions, and views of pregnant women about Caesarean section and reproductive decision-making in a specialist health facility in Enugu, Southeast Nigeria. Niger J Clin Pract; 21:423-8. Retrieved from: http://www.njcponline.com/text.asp?2018/21/4/423/229093,  July 19th, 2019.

Fraser, D.M, Cooper,  M.A & Nolte, A.G.W (2018), Myles Textbook for Midwives, African Edition, China, Churchill Living Stone.

Freeman, H. (2022), There is nothing wrong with a Caesarean section – so let’s quit judging other pregnant mothers,  Hadley Freeman's Weekend column Childbirth. Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/apr/02/nothing

Jones, H. (2018), Not Every Caesarean Section is a Bad Story, New York Times. Retrieved from: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/27/opinion/sunday/Caesarean section-risks-rates.html, July 20th, 2019.

Lawani, L.O et al (2019), Perception and Socio-cultural Barriers to the Acceptance of Caesarean Delivery in A Tertiary Hospital in Abakaliki, South East Nigeria, International Journal of Women’s Health and Reproduction Sciences, 7(2): 163–168. Retrieved from: http://www.ijwhr.net/pdf/pdf_IJWHR_377.pdf,  July 25th, 2019.

Marshall, J.E.,  Raynor, M.D., Nolte,  A.G.W &  Myles, M.F. (2016), Myles Textbook for Midwives, 16th Edition, China, Churchill Living Stone.

Narayanaswamy, M.,  Ambika, B. & Sruthi, T. (2016), Caesarean Delivery at Maternal Request in a Rural Medical College Hospital , Journal of Clinical Gynecology and Obstetrics, 5(2) 64-67. Retrieved from: https://www.jcgo.org/index.php/jcgo/article/view/290/243#R01, July 14th, 2019.

National Partnership for Women and Families (2019), Transforming Maternity Care: what are some factors driving use of Caesarean section in the united states?: a listening to pregnant mothers iii data brief. Retrieved from:https://transform.childbirthconnection.org/reports/listening, July 14th, 2019.

Purzucki, N. (2016), In Brazil, half of all pregnant mothers have Caesarean sections — whether they want it or not, PRI's The World, May 14, 2014, 10:15 PM EDT. https://www.pri.org/stories/2014-05-14/brazil-half-, July 14th, 2019.

Roux, S.L (2020), An exploratory study of pregnant mothers’ perceptions and experiences of an unplanned Caesarean section. Retrieved from: http://iteseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.839.3371. July 16th, 2019

Smith, L. (2018), What is Caesarean section? Medical NewsToday, Retrieved from: https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/299502.php, July 17th, 2019.

 Sunday-Adeoye, I.  & Kalu, C.A  (2011) on ‘Pregnant Nigerian women's view of Caesarean section’Nigeria Journal of Clinical Practice, 14 (3); 276-279. Retrieved from: http://www.njcponline.com/article.asp?issn=1119-, July 14th, 2019.

Ugwu, N.U. & Kok, B. (2015), Socio-cultural factors, gender roles and religious ideologies contributing to Caesarian-section refusal in Nigeria, Reproductive Health, 12:70. Retrieved from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.118 , July 28th, 2019.

World Health Organisation (2011),Factors influencing rising caesarean section rates in China between 1988 and 2008, Bulletin of the World Health Organization 2012;90:30-39A. doi: 10.2471/BLT.11.090399. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/90/1/11-090399/en/,  July 28th, 2019.

Ye, J., Zhang, J., Mikolajczyk, R., Torloni, M.R, Gulmezoglu, A.M & Betran, A.P (2016), Association between rates of caesarean section and maternal and neonatal mortality in the 21st century: a worldwide population-based ecological study with longitudinal data. BJOG. 2016; 123745-753.

 Zakerihamidi, M.,  Roudsari, R.L. & Khoei, E.M. (2015), Vaginal Delivery vs. Caesarean Section: A Focused Ethnographic Study of Women’s Perceptions in The North of Iran, Int J Community Based Nurs Midwifery. 2015 Jan; 3(1), 39–50.

Zamani-Alavijeh, F., Araban, F.,  Hassanzadeh, A.  &  Makhouli, K. (2018), Contributing factors of pregnant women’s beliefs towards mode of delivery: a cross-sectional study from Iran; Maternal Health, Neonatology and Perinatology, 4(9), doi https://doi.org/10.1186/s40748-018-0077-1.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

QUESTIONNAIRE ON

‘PERCEPTION OF PREGNANT MOTHERS’ ON CAESAREAN SECTION AS A METHOD OF BIRTH OPTION IN NIGER DELTA UNIVERSITY TEACHING HOSPITAL (NDUTH), OKOLOBIRI, BAYELSA STATE

 

SECTION A

(Instruction: Please tick [P] the correct answer in the options provided)

1.      Age (years)            (a) 18-22 [    ] (b) 23-27 [    ]   (c) 28-32 [    ] (d) 33 -37  (e) 38 and above [    ]

2.      Marital status (a) Married  [    ]     (b) Single [    ] (c) Separated  [    ]     (d)Divorced  [    ]   (e) Widow [     ]       

3.      Religion (a) Christianity [    ]        (b) Islamic  [    ]    (c) Others

4.      Educational background (a) Informal    [    ] (b) Primary [    ] (c) Secondary [   ]                        (d) Tertiary [  ]

5.      Parity:  (a)  Nil [    ] (b) One    [    ]   (c) Two  [    ]           (d) three    (e) four and above [    ]

6.      Trimester:   (a) First (1-3months) [    ] (b) Second (4 – 6months)  [    ]  (c) Third                         (7 – 9months) [    ]    

7.      Have you experienced Caesarean Section (C/S)? (a) Yes  [    ]   (b) No   [     ]

 

 


 

SECTION B

KEY:  SA – Strongly Agree             SD – Strongly disagree         D – Disagree

SD – Strongly Disagree         U – Undecided

S/N

ITEMS

SA

A

U

D

SD

 

PERCEPTION ON C/S AS A METHOD OF BIRTH OPTION

 

 

 

 

 

8.       

Caesarean section(C/S) is an alternative birth method to vaginal delivery

 

 

 

 

 

9.       

Will accept C/S by choice (elective) to avoid the  complications of labour and  labour pains

 

 

 

 

 

10.   

Will only accept C/S if my life or that of  my  baby(ies)  is/are in great danger

 

 

 

 

 

11.   

Will reluctantly accept C/S if healthcare providers say so

 

 

 

 

 

12.   

Will not accept C/S under any of the above circumstances

 

 

 

 

 

 

PERCEPTION ON FACTORS INFLUENCING CAESAREAN SECTION AS A METHOD OF BIRTH OPTION

 

 

 

 

 

13.   

C/S is undergone by women who are obstetric failure and lazy

 

 

 

 

 

14.   

C/S is undergone by unfaithful women

 

 

 

 

 

15.   

Will not undergo C/S due to criticism by husband, family members or friends

 

 

 

 

 

16.   

C/S is against my religious belief, practice and faith

 

 

 

 

 

17.   

Cannot undergo C/S due to its high cost

 

 

 

 

 

18.   

Cannot undergo C/S due to surgery team incompetence

 

 

 

 

 

19.   

Cannot undergo C/S due to fear of its complications (death, subsequent infertility, postoperative pain, C/S scar etc.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

VIEW ON STRATEGIES FOR CORRECTING THE NEGATIVE PERCEPTION ON C/S AS A METHOD OF   BIRTH OPTION

 

 

 

 

 

20.   

C/S is undergone by women who are obstetric failure and lazy

 

 

 

 

 

21.   

C/S is undergone by unfaithful women

 

 

 

 

 

22.   

C/S is undergone by cursed women

 

 

 

 

 

23.   

Will not undergo C/S due to criticism by husband, family members or friends

 

 

 

 

 

24.   

C/S is against my religious belief, practice and faith

 

 

 

 

 

25.   

Cannot undergo C/S due to its high cost

 

 

 

 

 

26.   

Cannot undergo C/S due to surgery team incompetence

 

 

 

 

 

27.   

Cannot undergo C/S due to fear of its complications (death, subsequent infertility, postoperative pain, C/S scar etc.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

PERCEPTION OF PREGNANT MOTHERS ON CAESAREAN SECTION AS A METHOD OF BIRTH OPTION IN NIGER DELTA UNIVERSITY TEACHING HOSPITAL, BAYELSA STATE.