Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Mode of Childbirth in Low-Risk Pregnancies: Nicaraguan Physicians’ Viewpoints

  • Published:
Maternal and Child Health Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 09 February 2024

This article has been updated

Abstract

To explore attitudes of physicians attending births in the public and private sectors and at the managerial level toward cesarean birth in Nicaragua. A qualitative study was conducted consisting of four focus groups with 17 physicians and nine in-depth interviews with decision-makers. Although study participants listed many advantages of vaginal birth and disadvantages of cesarean birth, they perceived that the increase in the cesarean birth rate in Nicaragua has resulted in a reduction in perinatal morbidity and mortality. They ascribed high cesarean birth rates to a web of interrelated provider, patient, and health system factors. They identified five actions that would facilitate a reduction in the number of unnecessary cesarean operations: establishing standards and protocols; preparing women and their families for labor and childbirth; incorporating cesarean birth rate monitoring and audit systems into quality assurance activities at the facility level; strengthening the movement to humanize birth; and promoting community-based interventions to educate women and families about the benefits of vaginal birth. Study participants believe that by performing cesarean operations they are providing the best quality of care feasible within their context. They do not perceive problems with their current practice. The identified causes of unnecessary cesarean operations in Nicaragua are multifactorial, so it appears that a multi-layered strategy is needed to safely reduce cesarean birth rates. The recent Nicaraguan Ministry of Health guidance to promote parto humanizado (“humanization of childbirth”) could serve as the basis for a collaborative effort among health care professionals, government, and consumer advocates to reduce the number of unnecessary cesarean births in Nicaragua.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

Abbreviations

INSS:

Nicaraguan Social Security Institute

MINSA:

Ministry of Health/Ministerio de Salud

Ob/gyn:

Obstetrics/gynecology

PATH:

Program for Appropriate Technology in Health

USAID:

United States Agency for International Development

References

  1. International Cesarean Awareness Network (ICAN). White papers: Cesarean fact sheet. International Cesarean Awareness Network, 2002.

  2. Villar, J., Valladares, E., Wojdyla, D., Zavaleta, N., Carroli, G., Velazco, A., et al. (2006). Caesarean delivery rates, pregnancy outcomes: The WHO global survey on maternal and perinatal health in Latin America. Lancet, 367(9525), 1819–1829.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Faúndes, A., & Cecatti, J. G. (1993). Which policy for caesarean sections in Brazil? An analysis of trends and consequences. Health Policy Plan, 8, 33–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Barros, F. C., Vaughan, J. P., Victora, C. G., & Huttly, S. R. A. (1991). Epidemic of Caesarean sections in Brazil. Lancet, 338, 167–169.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Murray, S. F., & Pradenas, F. S. (1986). Cesarean birth trends in Chile to 1994. Birth, 1997(24), 258–263.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Notzon, F. C., Cnattingius, S., Bergsjö, P., Cole, S., Taffel, S., Irgens, L., et al. (1994). Cesarean section delivery in the 1980s: International comparison by indication. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 170, 495–504.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ballacci, F., Medda, E., Pinnelli, A., & Spinelli, A. (1996). Cesarean delivery in Italy: An European record. Epidemiologia e Prevenzione, 20, 105–106.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Stjernholm, Y. V., Petersson, K., & Eneroth, E. (2010). Changed indications for cesarean sections. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 89, 49–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Betrán, A. P., Merialdi, M., Lauer, J. A., Bing-Shun, W., Thomas, J., Van Look, P., et al. (2007). Rates of cesarean section: Analysis of global, regional and national estimates. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 21, 98–113.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Belizán, J. M., Althabe, F., Barros, F. C., & Alexander, S. (1999). Rates and implications of caesarean section in Latin America: Ecological study. BMJ, 319, 1397–1400.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. World Health Organization (WHO). Country cooperation strategy at a glance, 2006. www.who.int/countries/nic/en. Accessed 23 Dec 2013.

  12. United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). The State of the world midwifery report, 2011. www.unfpa.org/. Accessed 23 Dec 2013.

  13. World Health Organization. Department of Reproductive Health and Research. Rising cesarean deliveries in Latin America: how best to monitor rates and risks. Geneva, Switzerland, 2009. https://extranet.who.int/iris/restricted/bitstream/10665/70034/1/WHO_RHR_09.05_eng.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2013.

  14. National Development Information Institute. Encuesta Nicaragüense de demografía y salud 2006/07: INIDE Informe final [Nicaraguan demographic and health survey 2006/07: Final INIDE report]. Managua, Nicaragua, 2008. http://www.inide.gob.ni/endesa/InformeFinal07.pdf. Accessed 2 May 2013.

  15. World Health Organization. (1985). Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet, 326(8452), 436–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ministerio de Salud. Normativa 042—Norma de Humanización del Parto Institucional. Managua: MINSA, 2010 Mayo.

  17. Dirección general de Servicios de Salud. Normativa 011—Normas y protocolos para la atención prenatal, parto y recién nacido y puerperio de bajo riesgo. Managua, MINSA, Agosto—2008.

  18. Robson, M. S., Scudamore, I. W., & Walsh, S. M. (1996). Using the medical audit cycle to reduce cesarean section rates. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 174(1), 199–205.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Main, E. K. (1999). Reducing cesarean birth rates with data-driven quality improvement activities. Pediatrics, 103, 374–383.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Chaillet, N., Dube, E., Dugas, M., Francoeur, D., Dube, J., Gagnon, S., et al. (2007). Identifying barriers and facilitators towards implementing guidelines to reduce cesarean section rates in Quebec. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 85(10), 791–797.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Chaillet, N., & Dumont, A. (2007). Evidence-based strategies for reducing cesarean rates: A meta analysis. Birth, 34(1), 53–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Althabe, F., Belizán, J. M., Villar, J., Alexander, S., Bergel, E., Ramos, S., et al. (2004). Mandatory second opinion to reduce rates of unnecessary cesarean sections in Latin America: A cluster randomized controlled trial. Lancet, 363, 1934–1940.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Chaillet, N., Dubé, E., Dugas, M., Francoeur, D., Dubé, J., Gagnon, S., et al. (2007). Identifying barriers and facilitators towards implementing guidelines to reduce caesarean section rates in Quebec. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 85(10), 791–797.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. National Institute of Health. Health and Research. www.niched.nih.org. Accessed 23 Dec 2013.

  25. Muiser, J., Sáenz, M., & Bermúdez, J. L. (2011). Sistema de Salud de Nicaragua. Salud Pública de México, 53(Suppl 2), S233–S242.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Pan American Health Organization. Country health profile, Nicaragua. From Health in the Americas, 2007. (Vol. II). http://www.paho.org/English/sha/prflnic.htm. Accessed 20 Feb 2013.

  27. Declercq, E. R., Sakala, C., Corry, M. P., Applebaum, S., Herrlich, A. (2013). Listening to mothers III: Pregnancy and birth. New York: Childbirth Connection, May 2013. http://transform.childbirthconnection.org/reports/listeningtomothers/.

  28. McCourt, C., Weaver, J., Statham, H., Beake, S., Gamble, J., Creedy, D. K. (2007). Elective cesarean section and decision making: A critical review of the literature. Birth, 34, 65–79. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1523-536X.2006.00147.x/full.

  29. Tully, K. P., & Ball, H. L. (2013). Misrecognition of need: Women’s experiences of and explanations for undergoing cesarean delivery. Social Science and Medicine, 85, 103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Liu, N. H., Mazzoni, A., Zamberlin, N., Colomar, M., Chang, O. H., Arnaud, L., et al. (2013). Preferences for mode of delivery in nulliparous Argentinean women: A qualitative study. Reproductive Health, 10(1), 2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Kornelsen, J., Hutton, E., & Munro, S. (2010). Influences on decision making among primiparous women choosing elective caesarean section in the absence of medical indications: Findings from a qualitative investigation. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada, 32(10), 962–969.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Sakala, C., Yang, Y. T., & Corry, M. P. (2013). Maternity care and liability: Pressing problems, substantive solutions. Women’s Health Issues, 23, e7–e13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Kessler, D. P., Summerton, N., & Graham, J. R. (2006). Effects of the medical liability system in Australia, the UK, and the USA. Lancet, 368, 240–246.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Sánchez-González, J. M., Tena-Tamayo, C., Campos-Castolo, E. M., Hernández-Gamboa, L. E., & Rivera-Cisneros, A. E. (2005). Defensive medicine in Mexico: An exploratory descriptive survey [SP]. Cirugia y Cirujanos, 73, 199–206.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Chassin, M. R., Halvin, R. W., & National Roundtable on Health Care Quality. (1998). The urgent need to improve health care quality. Institute of Medicine National Roundtable on Health Care Quality. JAMA, 280, 1000–1005.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Yazdizadeh, B., Nedjat, S., Mohammad, K., Rashidian, A., Changizi, N., & Majdzadeh, R. (2011). Cesarean section rate in Iran, multidimensional approaches for behavioral change of providers: A qualitative study. BMC Health Serv Res., 5(11), 159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kamal, P., Dixon-Woods, M., Kurinczuk, J. J., Oppenheimer, C., Squire, P., & Waugh, J. (2005). Factors influencing repeat caesarean section: Qualitative exploratory study of obstetricians’ and midwives’ accounts. BJOG, 112(8), 1054–1060.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), under the terms of the Leader with Associates Cooperative Agreement GHS-A-00-08-00002-00. The contents are the responsibility of the Maternal and Child Health Integrated Program (MCHIP) and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States government. The intervention was implemented by the Ministry of Health of Nicaragua (MINSA) with technical support from USAID’s flagship maternal, neonatal and child health program (MCHIP), PATH/Seattle and Managua, the Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS), and the Montevideo Clinical and Epidemiological Research Unit (UNICEM). We thank Yann Lacayo, Henry Espinoza and Margarita Quintanilla from PATH/Nicaragua for their help in the organization of the focus groups and in-depth interviews.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Montevideo Clinical and Epidemiological Research Unit, UNICEM, Hosp Clinicas, Av Italia s/n, Montevideo, Uruguay

    Mercedes Colomar, Maria Luisa Cafferata & Alicia Aleman

  2. Department of Preventive Medicine and Hygiene, University of the Republic, Montevideo, Uruguay

    Graciela Castellano

  3. Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Ezequiel Garcia-Elorrio & Fernando Althabe

  4. PATH, Seattle, WA, USA

    Susheela Engelbrecht

Authors
  1. Mercedes Colomar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria Luisa Cafferata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alicia Aleman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Graciela Castellano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ezequiel Garcia-Elorrio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Fernando Althabe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Susheela Engelbrecht
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mercedes Colomar.

Additional information

The original online version of this article was revised: the given name and family name of author Ezequiel Garcia-Elorrio has been updated.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Colomar, M., Cafferata, M.L., Aleman, A. et al. Mode of Childbirth in Low-Risk Pregnancies: Nicaraguan Physicians’ Viewpoints. Matern Child Health J 18, 2382–2392 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-014-1478-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-014-1478-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation