https://www.mdu.se/

mdu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Caesarean section on maternal request: a qualitative study of conflicts related to shared decision-making and person-centred care in Sweden
Uppsala Univ, Dept Publ Hlth & Caring Sci, Hlth Serv Res, Box 564, S-75122 Uppsala, Sweden..
Mälardalen University, School of Health, Care and Social Welfare, Health and Welfare. Uppsala Univ, Dept Publ Hlth & Caring Sci, Hlth Serv Res, Box 564, S-75122 Uppsala, Sweden..ORCID iD: 0000-0002-4302-5529
Uppsala Univ, Ctr Res Eth & Bioeth, Dept Publ Hlth & Caring Sci, Box 564, S-75122 Uppsala, Sweden..
Akad Sjukhuset, Akutmottagningen Gynekol, S-75185 Uppsala, Sweden..
Show others and affiliations
2024 (English)In: Reproductive Health, E-ISSN 1742-4755, Vol. 21, no 1, article id 97Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

BackgroundToday, person-centred care is seen as a cornerstone of health policy and practice, but accommodating individual patient preferences can be challenging, for example involving caesarean section on maternal request (CSMR). The aim of this study was to explore Swedish health professionals' perspectives on CSMR and analyse them with regard to potential conflicts that may arise from person-centred care, specifically in relation to shared decision-making.MethodsA qualitative study using both inductive and deductive content analysis was conducted based on semi-structured interviews. It was based on a purposeful sampling of 12 health professionals: seven obstetricians, three midwives and two neonatologists working at different hospitals in southern and central Sweden. The interviews were recorded either in a telephone call or in a video conference call, and audio files were deleted after transcription.ResultsIn the interviews, twelve types of expressions (sub-categories) of five types of conflicts (categories) between shared decision-making and CSMR emerged. Most health professionals agreed in principle that women have the right to decide over their own body, but did not believe this included the right to choose surgery without medical indications (patient autonomy). The health professionals also expressed that they had to consider not only the woman's current preferences and health but also her future health, which could be negatively impacted by a CSMR (treatment quality and patient safety). Furthermore, the health professionals did not consider costs in the individual decision, but thought CSMR might lead to crowding-out effects (avoiding treatments that harm others). Although the health professionals emphasised that every CSMR request was addressed individually, they referred to different strategies for avoiding arbitrariness (equality and non-discrimination). Lastly, they described that CSMR entailed a multifaceted decision being individual yet collective, and the use of birth contracts in order to increase a woman's sense of security (an uncomplicated decision-making process).ConclusionsThe complex landscape for handling CSMR in Sweden, arising from a restrictive approach centred on collective and standardised solutions alongside a simultaneous shift towards person-centred care and individual decision-making, was evident in the health professionals' reasoning. Although most health professionals emphasised that the mode of delivery is ultimately a professional decision, they still strived towards shared decision-making through information and support. Given the different views on CSMR, it is of utmost importance for healthcare professionals and women to reach a consensus on how to address this issue and to discuss what patient autonomy and shared decision-making mean in this specific context. Person-centered care is today a widespread approach, but accommodating individual patient preferences can be challenging, for example involving caesarean section on maternal request (CSMR). This study examines Swedish health professionals' views on CSMR. Interviews with 12 health professionals reveal conflicts between CSMR and key aspects of person-centered care, in particular shared decision-making. While professionals acknowledge women's autonomy, they question CSMR without medical need. Concerns include for example treatment quality and patient safety, and avoiding treatments that harm others. The Swedish context, balancing collective solutions with individualized care, complicates decision-making. Unlike countries with more private healthcare, where CSMR support might be higher, Swedish health professionals emphasize shared decision-making despite viewing the mode of delivery as primarily a professional decision. This study sheds light on the challenges in integrating CSMR into person-centered care frameworks.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
BioMed Central (BMC), 2024. Vol. 21, no 1, article id 97
Keywords [en]
Caesarean section on maternal request (CSMR), Person-centred care, Obstetric care, Childbirth, Qualitative method, Patient autonomy
National Category
Gynaecology, Obstetrics and Reproductive Medicine
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-68067DOI: 10.1186/s12978-024-01831-zISI: 001263560600001PubMedID: 38956635Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85197463932OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mdh-68067DiVA, id: diva2:1884507
Available from: 2024-07-17 Created: 2024-07-17 Last updated: 2025-02-11Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Holmström, IngerMattebo, Magdalena

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Holmström, IngerMattebo, Magdalena
By organisation
Health and Welfare
In the same journal
Reproductive Health
Gynaecology, Obstetrics and Reproductive Medicine

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 63 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf