Delivery Patterns and Factors Associated with the Preference for Elective Cesarean Section among Obstetricians and Midwives at Mashhad University of Medical Sciences in 2022: A Cross-Sectional Study

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Obstetrician and Gynecologist, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

2 Associate Professor, Department of Health Economics and Management, School of Health, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

3 Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

4 4Associate Professor, Department of Midwifery, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

10.22038/ijogi.2025.87656.6425

Abstract

Introduction: The delivery preferences of maternity care providers, particularly obstetricians and midwives, significantly influence mothers’ choices regarding their mode of delivery. Regarding to the increasing rates of elective cesarean sections in Iran, examining the delivery patterns of these professionals is of great importance. Therefore, the present study was conducted with aims to investigate the types of deliveries performed by midwives and obstetricians and the factors associated with their preference for elective cesarean sections at Mashhad University of Medical Sciences.
Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted in 2022 among obstetricians and midwives working at Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. Sampling was performed using a convenience method through the distribution of an electronic questionnaire (via Porsline). The questionnaire included demographic information, delivery history, type of delivery (vaginal or cesarean), and reasons for preferring elective cesarean sections. Data were analyzed using SPSS software (version 16) and Chi-square test. P<0.05 was considered significant.
Results: Among the participants, 81 (28%) experienced a vaginal delivery in their first childbirth, while the others chose a cesarean section. The most common reasons for selecting elective cesarean sections in the first delivery included fear of pain in 126 subjects (61%), concern about perineal injury in 124 (60%), and dissatisfaction with frequent vaginal examinations in 90 (43%). No significant difference was observed between midwives and obstetricians regarding the type of delivery in the first childbirth (P=0.677); however, midwives showed a greater inclination to choose cesarean sections in their second deliveries. Delivery in non-university hospitals was also associated with a higher rate of cesarean sections.
Conclusion: Most participants preferred cesarean sections not due to medical indications but for psychological and social reasons. The results highlight the necessity of expanding pain relief methods during childbirth, promoting the presence of support persons, and fostering social awareness to accept vaginal delivery as a safe and physiological process.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Gibbons L, Belizán JM, Lauer JA, Betrán AP, Merialdi M, Althabe F. The global numbers and costs of additionally needed and unnecessary caesarean sections performed per year: overuse as a barrier to universal coverage. World health report 2010; 30(1):1-31.
  2. Florica M, Stephansson O, Nordström L. Indications associated with increased cesarean section rates in a Swedish hospital. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics 2006; 92(2):181-5.
  3. Miri Farahani L, Abbasi Shavazi MJ. Caesarean section change trends in Iran and some demographic factors associated with them in the past three decades. Journal of Advanced Biomedical Sciences 2012; 2(3):127-34.
  4. Alimohamadian M, Shariat M, Mahmoodi M, Ramezanzadeh F. The influence of maternal request on the elective cesarean section rate in maternity hospitals in Tehran, Iran. Payesh (Health Monitor) 2003; 2(2):137-42.
  5. Shams-Ghahfarrokhi Z, Khalajabadi Farahani F, Saraei H. Determinants of intention for cesarean section vs. normal delivery among pregnant women in Esfahan. Journal of Population Association of Iran 2014; 9(17):199-224.
  6. Alimohammadzade K, Mohebi S. Systematic review of research papers in the recent three decades on the “reasons of cesarean section” and population health management strategies in Iran. Women's strategic studies 2013; 16(61):7-57.
  7. Norberg K, Pantano J. Cesarean sections and subsequent fertility. Journal of Population Economics 2016; 29(1):5-37.
  8. Baker ER, D'alton ME. Cesarean section birth and cesarean hysterectomy. Clinical obstetrics and gynecology 1994; 37(4):806-15.
  9. Bani S, Seyedrasooli E, Ghoreishi TS, Ghoojazadeh M, Hassanpoor S. Preference of delivery attendants regarding mode of delivery for themselves and pregnant women. Payesh (Health Monitor) 2012; 11(5):629-35.
  10. Mohammadpourasl A, Asgharian P, Rostami F, Azizi A, Akbari H. Investigating the choice of delivery method type and its related factors in pregnant women in Maragheh. Journal of Knowledge & Health in Basic Medical Sciences2009; 4(1):36-39.
  11. Fardi Azar Z, Jafari SM. A survey for determining factors on women's attitudes toward vaginal and cesarean delivery. Medical Journal of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences2003; 59:66-69.
  12. Kaplan HC, Brady PW, Dritz MC, Hooper DK, Linam WM, Froehle CM, et al. The influence of context on quality improvement success in health care: a systematic review of the literature. The Milbank Quarterly 2010; 88(4):500-59.
  13. Peydayesh M, Zamani N, Mohseni M, Dehghani Z, Nikfar S. The prevalence of cesarean section and some related factors: A cross sectional study in Iran. Annals of the Romanian Society for Cell Biology 2021; 25(6):3711-7.
  14. Francome C, Savage W. Caesarean section in Britain and the United States 12% or 24%: is either the right rate?. Social science & medicine 1993; 37(10):1199-218.
  15. Eyi EG, Mollamahmutoglu L. An analysis of the high cesarean section rates in Turkey by Robson classification. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine 2021; 34(16):2682-92.
  16. Anderson GM, Lomas J. Explaining variations in cesarean section rates: patients, facilities or policies?. Canadian Medical Association Journal 1985; 132(3):253.
  17. Faraji DR, Zahiri SZ, Farjad BF. A survey of knowledge and attitude of pregnant women about delivery methods. Journal of Guilan University of Medical Sciences 2003; 12(46):69-75.
  18. Laluei A, Kashanizadeh N, Teymouri M. The influence of academic educations on choosing preferable delivery method in obstetrics medical team: investigating their viewpoints. Iranian Journal of Medical Education 2009; 9(1).
  19. Kiani A, Heidari M, Rahnama P, Mohammaditabar S. Midwives’attitudes and Related Factors Towards Elective Cesarean Section. Payesh (Health Monitor) 2014; 13(3):331-8.
  20. Arikan DC, Özer A, Arikan I, Coskun A, Kiran H. Turkish obstetricians’ personal preference for mode of delivery and attitude toward cesarean delivery on maternal request. Archives of gynecology and obstetrics 2011; 284(3):543-9.
  21. Nasrollahi S, Heydari P, Khalajinia Z. A survey of obstetrics team’s attitude and preference toward mode of delivery in Alborz Province maternity clinics and hospitals in 2011. The Iranian Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Infertility 2013; 15(37):21-8.
  22. Fabri RH, Murta EF. Socioeconomic factors and cesarean section rates. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics 2002; 76(1):87-8.
  23. Abdolfazl Mohammad B, Seyed Hamid Reza T, Narges Mohammad S, Maryam Y. Factors influencing cesarean delivery method in Shiraz hospitals: 37-45.
  24. Dickson MJ, Willett M. Midwives would prefer a vaginal delivery. BMJ: British Medical Journal 1999; 319(7215):1008.
  25. Mc Gurgan P, Coulter-Smith S, O’Donovan PJ. A national confidential survey of obstetrician’s personal preferences regarding mode of delivery. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology 2001; 97(1):17-9.
  26. Hantoushzadeh S, Rajabzadeh A, Saadati A, Mahdanian A, Ashrafinia N, Khazardoost S, et al. Caesarean or normal vaginal delivery: overview of physicians’ self-preference and suggestion to patients. Archives of gynecology and obstetrics 2009; 280(1):33-7.
  27. Karlström A, Rådestad I, Eriksson C, Rubertsson C, Nystedt A, Hildingsson I. Cesarean section without medical reason, 1997 to 2006: a Swedish register study. Birth 2010; 37(1):11-20.
  28. 27Abd El-Aziz SN, Mansour S, Hassan NF. Factors associated with fear of childbirth: It’s effect on women’s preference for elective cesarean section. J Nurs Educ Pract 2017; 7(1):133-46.
  29. Khalesi ZB. Relationship between Primigravid women’s awareness, attitude, fear of childbirth, and mode of delivery preference. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology: X. 2022; 14:100143.
  30. Asad U, Imran S, Ilyas M, Israr S, Lashari K. Psychosocial and Emotional Factors Influencing the Choice between Cesarean Section and Natural Birth. Frontiers in Health Informatics 2024; 13(1).
  31. Steer PJ, James DK. High Risk Pregnancy: Management Options. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2011.
  32. Mobaraki A, Zadehbagheri GH, Zandi Ghashghaie KA. Prevalence of cesarean section and the related causes in Yasuj city in 2003. Armaghane danesh 2005; 10(3):67-73.
The Iranian Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Infertility
Volume 28, Issue 7
September 2025
Pages 21-33

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics