Could a randomised trial answer the controversy relating to elective caesarean section? National survey of consultant obstetricians and heads of midwifery
- 22 August 2005
- Vol. 331 (7515) , 490-491
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38560.572639.3a
Abstract
We aimed to survey all consultant obstetricians and heads of midwifery (gatekeepers to such a trial) practising in England between January 2003 and May 2004. We explored their views of women's requests for caesarean section without clinical indication and of a possible randomised controlled trial in a postal survey. We used semistructured questionnaires with closed questions followed by free text spaces to provide supporting rationale. Comparisons were made between professionals and according to parental status, sex, and type of unit where they worked. We used χ2 tests to compare the proportion of respondents saying “yes” to each question. Two of the authors (TL, CK) manually analysed qualitative responses.Keywords
This publication has 4 references indexed in Scilit:
- Caesarean Section. Clinical Guideline. National Collaborating Centre for Women's and Children's Health:Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 2004
- Once a pregnancy, always a cesarean? Rationale and feasibility of a randomized controlled trialAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2004
- Elective Primary Cesarean DeliveryNew England Journal of Medicine, 2003
- For and against: Clinical equipoise and not the uncertainty principle is the moral underpinning of the randomised controlled trial FOR AGAINSTBMJ, 2000