Please wait a minute...
Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology  2016, Vol. 43 Issue (6): 792-794    DOI: 10.12891/ceog3404.2016
Original Research Previous articles | Next articles
Flemish obstetricians’ personal preference regarding induction of labor and mode of delivery in term births
H. Sonnemans1, A. Schmid2, J. Muys2, Y. Jacquemyn2, *()
1Jan Palfijn Hospital, Antwerp
2Antwerp University Hospital UZA, Edegem (Belgium)
Download:  PDF(73KB)  ( 9 )
Export:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
Abstract  
Introduction: In a 2002 survey, 2% of Flemish gynecologists preferred elective cesarean section for themselves or their partner. This study aims to determine actual preference regarding induction of labor and mode of delivery in term cephalic or breech births for gynecologists or their partners. Materials and Methods: An anonymous postal questionnaire was sent to all gynecologists and trainees in Flanders. Results: Response rate was 28.2 % (241/852). In case of an uncomplicated cephalic singleton pregnancy, 39 gynecologists (16.2%) preferred cesarean section. Most (n=134, 66.5%) chose induction at 41 weeks, 26 (13%) at 40 weeks, 37 (18%) at 42 weeks, 26 (13%) at 40 weeks, three (1.5%) preferred induction before 40 weeks and two (1%) would wait until after 42 weeks. Concerning term breech, 30% (n=72) opted for vaginal delivery and 70% (n = 169) for planned cesarean section. Ninety-nine (41%) gynecologists preferred to attempt external version first. Only 115 (47.7 %) gynecologists felt professionally capable to assist vaginal breech delivery themselves; about one-third (n=96; 38%) had performed less than ten vaginal breech deliveries in their career. Conclusions: Flemish gynecologists are still in favor of vaginal delivery for themselves in terms of cephalic position, but an increasing number favor planned cesarean section. Most Flemish gynecologists opt for cesarean section for themselves or their partners in case of term breech and state that they do not feel capable in assisting vaginal breech delivery for their patients.
Key words:  Cesarean      Induction of labor      Breech      Gynecologist      Obstetrics     
Published:  10 December 2016     
*Corresponding Author(s):  Y. JACQUEMYN     E-mail:  Yves.jacquemyn@uza.be

Cite this article: 

H. Sonnemans, A. Schmid, J. Muys, Y. Jacquemyn. Flemish obstetricians’ personal preference regarding induction of labor and mode of delivery in term births. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2016, 43(6): 792-794.

URL: 

https://ceog.imrpress.com/EN/10.12891/ceog3404.2016     OR     https://ceog.imrpress.com/EN/Y2016/V43/I6/792

[1] Xin Du, Qian Zou, Yu-Lan Liu. Transumbilical single-hole laparoscopic treatment of cesarean scar pregnancy by uterine artery pre-ligation: a report of 4 cases[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(5): 1044-1047.
[2] Athanasia Tsaroucha, Aliki Tympa Grigoriadou, Tania Moshovou, Kassiani Theodoraki, Aikaterini Melemeni. Efficacy of intrathecally administered fentanyl versus dexmedetomidine for cesarean section: a double blinded, randomized clinical trial[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(5): 1065-1070.
[3] Eser Ağar, Seda Şahin Aker. Effect of sexual dysfunction on women's preference for delivery methods: a social media-based survey[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(5): 1154-1161.
[4] Uros Visic, Tatjana Stopar Pintaric, Tit Albreht, Iva Blajic, Miha Lucovnik. Multimodal stepwise analgesia for reducing opioid consumption after cesarean delivery[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(5): 1162-1166.
[5] Lorenz Hinterleitner, Herbert Kiss, Johannes Ott. The impact of Cesarean section on female fertility: a narrative review[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(4): 781-786.
[6] Dragan Belci, Gian Carlo Di Renzo, Davor Zoričić, Andrea Tinelli, Antonio Malvasi, Michael Stark. Less is more—a minimal approach technique for Cesarean Section[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(3): 478-482.
[7] Eser Ağar, Gökhan Karakoç. Comparison of electrocautery and scalpel for blood loss and postoperative pain in Pfannenstiel incisions in recurrent cesarean sections: a randomized controlled trial[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(3): 534-539.
[8] Lin Ling, Juanjuan Fu, Lei Zhan, Wenyan Wang, Qian Su, Jun Li, Bing Wei. Surgical management for type II cesarean scar pregnancy[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(3): 555-560.
[9] Lejla Kamerić, Anis Cerovac, Mirzeta Rizvanović, Alen Kamerić, Mahira Jahić, Dubravko Habek. Frequency of cesarean section in pregnant women with risk factors for preeclampsia: prospective cohort study[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(3): 561-566.
[10] Batool Ali H. Alkhazal, Majed Abdullah Halawani, Ibtihal Omar Alsahabi, Hassan S.O. Abduljabbar. The preferred mode of delivery among primigravida Middle Eastern Women. A questionnaire based study[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(3): 567-571.
[11] Faris Mujezinović, Veronika Anzeljc, Monika Sobočan, Iztok Takač. Do women in Slovenia prefer vaginal birth after prior caesarean and what hinders its successful outcome? A single institution retrospective analysis[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(3): 607-614.
[12] Antonio Coviello, Concetta Posillipo, Ludovica Golino, Carlo De Angelis, Elisabetta Gragnano, Gabriele Saccone, Marilena Ianniello, Gaetano Castellano, Annachiara Marra, Alfredo Maresca, Maria Vargas, Giuseppe Servillo. Anesthesiologic management of pregnant women with SARS-COV-2 infection undergoing cesarean delivery[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(3): 628-630.
[13] Ryuichi Shimaoka, Tomomi Shiga, Ken-ichirou Morishige. Change in uterine artery blood flow with intrauterine balloon tamponade[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(2): 307-311.
[14] Jun Xiong, Fen Fu, Wei Zhang, Ji Luo, Yuan-Yuan Xu, Lu-Lu Le, Xiao-Ju He. Study on influencing factors and related clinical issues in cesarean scar pregnancy[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(2): 365-371.
[15] Min Zhang, Zhan-Hong Tang, Han-Chun Wen, Ying-Lin Wu, Xing-Xin Gao. Clinical characteristics and outcomes of obstetric patients requiring ICU admission: a 5-year retrospective review[J]. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021, 48(1): 117-121.
No Suggested Reading articles found!