333 women arrived in the labour ward of the selected facilities during the period of the study. Subsequently, 27 participants either chose to leave the facilities themselves for care elsewhere or were referred by the treating physician to higher level of care. This left 306 who were observed until the point of normal delivery or consent for CS. Observation was started during their first stage of labor for 98 women, and during their second stage of labor for 108 women depending on the time of their arrival at the facility. Two hundred (65%) of these women delivered by caesarean section and 106 women had a vaginal birth (See Fig. 1). The number of observations ranged from 27 in the least busy to 67 in the busiest hospital.
Figure 1: Flow diagram of the participants in the observation study component
Table 1 shows the characteristics of the participants whose labour situations were observed. Most of the women were in the age group of 19–24 and had primary education or less. Out of the 306 women observed, 111 (36.3%) women were primigravid.
Table 1
Characteristics of women, whose labour situations were observed
Characteristic | Number (%) |
Age | 306(100) |
18–19 | 32 (10.5) |
19–24 | 116 (37.9) |
25–29 | 100 (32.7) |
30–34 | 52 (17.0) |
> 35 | 6 (2) |
Education | |
No education | 39 (12.6) |
Grades 1–6 | 134 (43.8) |
Grades 7–12 | 76 (24.9) |
College | 57 (18.6) |
The OPTION 5 tool scored the five domains of shared decision making between the service provider and the pregnant women in the labor setting. Each observation is given a score of 0–20 and then multiplied by five to give a score out of 100. A score of 100 denotes exemplary effort in the shared decision-making process while a score of zero implies no effort at all. The majority, 92.5% of the encounters in this study, scored less than 25% of the maximum score. Just over ten per cent (12.1%) scored zero. The overall mean score for OPTION 5 was 14.9 out of 100. The OPTION5 item wise mean scores for presenting options, patient partnership, describing pros/cons, eliciting patient preferences and integrating patient preferences are shown in Table 2. In line with the overall score, individual scores across all the five domains were very low. Since the observation data includes both CS and normal deliveries, further analysis was done to see if there was any statistically significant difference in the patterns of shared decision-making in CS and normal vaginal deliveries (NVDs). We used the t test for independent means to test for significance. When the mean difference of the overall scores of the two groups were compared there was no statistically significant difference (p-value < 0.05). Among the individual domains, we observed a statistically significant difference only in the pros/cons domain.
Table 2
Item | All encounters (N = 306) | NVD (n = 106) | CS (n = 200) | Mean difference (95% Confidence Interval) |
Item 1 (presenting options) | 5.03 (± 2.38) | 5.24 (± 2.88) | 4.93(± 3.03) | 0.31(-1.01,0.39) |
Item 2 (patient partnership) | 4.02 (± 2.15) | 3.96(± 2.82) | 4.05(± 2.62) | 0.09(-0.55, 0.72) |
Item 3 (describing pros/cons) | 2.48 (± 2.20) | 1.84(± 2.70) | 2.83(± 2.73) | 0.99(0.34, 1.63)* |
Item 4 (eliciting patient preferences) | 1.90 (± 2.34) | 1.32(± 2.42) | 2.20(± 3.12) | 0.88(0.19, 1.56) |
Item 5 (integrating patient preferences) | 1.49 (± 2.0) | 1.13(± 2.32) | 1.68(± 2.57) | 0.55(-0.04, 1.13) |
Total score | 14.92 (± 10.5) | 13.49(± 10.15) | 15.69(± 10.64) | 2.20(-0.29, 4.66) |
*p value < 0.05 |
Contextual factors influencing how physicians communicate during decision-making for caesarean section
Sixteen interviews were conducted with physicians. At selected study sites all the physicians performing CSs were female. Consequently, all the physician interviewees were female. The ages of participants ranged from 30 to 47 years (mean 39 years), with years of obstetric experience ranging from 4–28 years (mean 11 years). All participants had a degree or a diploma in obstetrics. Six participants had one child and ten had two children. Fourteen out of sixteen physicians, had their children by CS.
Additional File 3: Annex 3a shows the codes, categories, emergent themes and organizing themes from which the principal finding the importance of wider contextual factors on decision-making emerged.
The first organizing theme from within encapsulates factors that were intrinsic to the physician; namely, work-life balance and personal preferences. Physicians reported being overworked. They were balancing wide-ranging public-sector roles with private practice, which meant long hours, and an ongoing struggle to find time for their own families. They identified these competing demands as preventing them from spending time communicating with pregnant women and their relatives. “I always used to work with normal deliveries… but here in this centre, I have to perform C-sections, ward rounds, and even some office work as well. It is not possible for one person to do everything, so we have to make a balance… a physician cannot attend everywhere.” - Physician 10; “I have to see sixty patients daily. If I have to counsel attendants of every one of them, then I won’t have time for doing operations.” Physician 7 “My child is very young, so I can’t afford much time.” - Physician 1
As alluded to in the quote from Physician 10, participants acknowledged that labour and vaginal deliveries take time. Time that they do not have. Participants were open about the demands on them as professionals, and as women. Working at night engendered specific concerns about personal security, lack of transport and childcare. Personal preferences informed by personal and professional experiences were also reported as important influencing factors, overriding international and national guidelines, which they perceived as irrelevant to their local situation. “Sometimes we couldn’t follow the protocol exactly. We do it from our experience.”- Physician 4
Some physicians discussed feelings of uncertainty surrounding indications for CS and inconsistencies in practice. They were not aware of their own or their institutional CS rate, but as previously reported 14 of the 16 physicians had CSs themselves. While these participants were insistent that their CSs were for valid medical indications, there were contradictions in their accounts which suggest it was also their preference. “It was my fault. I was a high-risk mother. I had a bad obstetric history. I had two abortion experiences. So, we didn’t want to take any risk. Though the next issue came within 13 months after the first delivery, I have to go for C-section.” - Physician 4
The second organizing theme from without encapsulates factors that were extrinsic to the physician which they reported exerted an external influence on how they communicated with patients in the context of CS decision-making. These external influences included co-workers, family members, local politicians and journalists/ mass-media professionals. “Of course, the patient of a journalist is like the political person. They force me to do caesarean at 3 a.m. They are very dangerous. Nowadays, there are so many journalists. Easily they become a journalist. It’s become a phobia to us.” - Physician 11
The third organizing theme system and skills encapsulates three emergent factors; risk aversion, communication skills and health system factors. Risk aversion is viewed as defensive obstetrics, specifically thinking of the worst possible outcome in each instance and protecting one’s self from blame and repercussions. This is seen as a critical factor behind the CS decision-making process. The risk and fear come less from litigation [27], unlike in the Western world, and more from physical threats and professional disrepute. The physicians seem to acknowledge their limitations in communication skills. They experience minimal training during their medical education and learning from teachers during ward rounds, but they wanted more formal communication training. The physicians cited many challenges in the physical infrastructure, manpower, availability of supplies and support personnel. These constraints also had a bearing on their CS decision-making. “We do not have enough anaesthetists. So, it has become a kind of official order that sirs (anaesthetists) are to inject anaesthesia only in the morning, not in the evening or at night. So, we do not have an operation theatre in the evening or at night.” - Physician 1; Counselling is a part of our academic study. That’s what we call communication part. Communication with patients is very important and if there is any training in this regard, then it is easy to handle the patients. – Physician 7
In summary, the physicians were under pressure from within, without and the systems they operate within. All these factors have rendered the physicians ‘risk averse’ and had a major impact on their communication with women and their families.
Contextual factors influencing how women perceive their role in decision-making about emergency CS
The majority of women interviewed (7/16) were in the age group of 19–24 (mean age 22.9 years). The majority of women (7/16) had 1–6 years of schooling only. All women were primiparous. Additional File 3: Annex 3b shows the codes and themes from which the principal finding of the broader influential factors on patients had emerged.
The first organizing theme of guilt comprises the reasons behind the women yielding to local pressure exerted by the healthcare environment they found themselves in. One explanation for such feelings of guilt was in the current, as expressed by this woman; “We were bound to take the decision to have a CS. We wanted to have a normal delivery at home. We tried by the traditional birth attendant at home and it failed; we were afraid” - Emergency CS patient 15. Feelings of guilt were also future orientated, faced with the prospect of not consenting to CS and their baby subsequently dying.
The second organizing theme of powerlessness was driven by a lack of trust between the patient and the physician. In most instances, the women had visited multiple health facilities and had seen many health care providers before they arrived in the health facility where the CS happened. A sense of mistrust was perpetuated by a lack of respect, empathy and care from the staff in the short time the women were there. The women were rendered powerless to express their preference either in fear to speak up or believed that it was pointless communicating their wishes to the staff. “How could we (discuss our preferred mode of delivery)? Is it possible to tell physician everything? Why didn’t we tell? We were afraid; it’s not possible to say so many things” – Emergency CS patient 10
The third theme that emerged was women’s knowledge about indications for CS. Women and their families seemed pre-sensitized to some common reasons’ physicians performed CS and appeared agreeable to CS when they heard these indications from their physician. Variations in blood pressure, no fluid in the baby sac (oligohydramnios), big baby, baby in the foot or bottom presentation (breech) and short stature of mother are some of the indications that appeared frequently in discussions. Women obtained this information prior to coming to the hospital from various sources including the internet, those who had a past CS, from their radiologists who did ultra-sonograms at various stages of their pregnancy, traditional healers and others community members. While it is a well- established fact that breech presentation is common in the early stage of pregnancy and the baby’s position can change later, in the mind of the mother, this remained deep-rooted and set an expectation on the need for CS. “Then I did ultra-sonogram on 7th month to know baby’s condition. After going there, they reported baby’s position was breech then.” – Emergency CS patient 6
At the same time as women were familiar with some of the common justifications for CS, the fourth theme of language comprised how the negative and technical language used by health care providers caused distress to women and their families. The language in the health care settings was either too intimidating or too technical for the women, who were young and often came from poor and low-literacy backgrounds. Agreement to the CS procedure sometimes occurred due to fright or technical intimidation. As evident in this quote, some technical messages were not given directly to the woman in labour, but rather to their relatives, or in discussion between physicians and other healthcare providers, which the women sometimes overheard; “She told my sister, asking me to go out of the room, that it would be difficult to save my baby and me. She frightened my sister by saying this.” - Emergency CS patient 13.
This, in turn, led to the final theme of decision under pressure, which included a sense of fatalism due to either from lack of financial resources to explore alternates or to simply get relief and bring a quick end to the immense pressure generated by the situation. The quote from the woman below encapsulates both the pre-existing knowledge women brought to bear and the pressure they were under in the moment. “I was afraid of it. I always prayed to Almighty to have a normal delivery at home instead of having a hospital delivery. But Allah has brought me here to have this baby” – Emergency CS patient 3; “That physician suggested to do C-section and told us to let them know our decision within 5 minutes. I prayed to the Almighty for whatever was better to happen. If C-section is required, why delay? We proceeded.” - Emergency CS patient 10:
Contextual factors influencing how women perceive their role in decision-making about elective CS
Half the (16) women interviewed were in the age group of 19–24 and had completed their primary education. All women were primiparous. Detailed codes, categories, themes and contexts are provided as Additional file 3: Annex 3c.
The first organizing theme among women who underwent elective CS surrounded the perceived safety of CS. This theme encompassed emergent themes of confidence in safety of CS, ultrasonogram (USG) and its universality and faith. It was observed that some of the women had derived their confidence in the safety of CS by witnessing their friends and relatives have a CS and recover fully. As one woman reported; “My friends also had a CS operation, it was safe and for this reason, I had the desire of doing mine”- Elective CS patient 5. Some women reported that the only risk they knew of as associated with CS were the challenges in doing daily chores for some time. The women’s confidence that CS was safe was linked to their faith and sacrificial attitude towards motherhood. “Almighty knows everything that would save (my) baby” - Elective CS patient 6.
Alongside women’s religious beliefs was a belief in technology. Ultrasound scans (USG) in particular. USG was found to play a crucial part in convincing women of the need for CS. There was near universality in the use of USG among the interviewed women. Some women had up to four USGs during the course of their pregnancy. Breech presentation during the early stages of pregnancy, low amniotic fluid index, big baby and other similar indications seem to be planted in the minds of the women as ‘high risk’ for their babies, which was amplified as they approached term. “In the one and half month of my pregnancy once I did ultrasonography in private (private clinic). Again, I did it in the third month and made a card, again, in the eighth month and in the ninth month after getting admitted. Total four times – baby was upside down and I knew I will need CS.”- Elective CS patient 9
Above all, the confidence in safety was derived from various forms of faith, mostly religious but also some traditional beliefs, making it a recurrent theme. This gave them confidence in the CS decision as they had resigned themselves to the fact that what was happening was due to divine will or as a counter to evil forces as indicated by some traditional healers. “When I was pregnant, then the Kobiraj (traditional healer) warned me that some evil spirit wanted to harm me any time in the dusk. He also told me that the evil spirit passed over the roof of my house. He also could foretell that once I had gone to my relative’s house and during my pee, I did not cover my head. And since then, that the evil spirit had been after me to harm my body.” - Elective CS patient 3
The second theme that emerged from this group was placing the physicians in control of final decision-making. The act of giving consent was seen more as a formality by most women as they were not even aware of the purpose of signing the consent form. As one woman said, “I don’t know for which reason they took signature. I just signed.” - Elective CS patient 4
The women believed that physicians know best and are too powerful for them to discuss preferences. Only one of the women’s comments led to the theme of collateral benefits. She spoke of the financial advantages of being able to combine CS and tubal ligation in one care episode. This decision seemed to have been made early in their pregnancy. Lack of adequate privacy was the final theme that emerged, as women were forced to consent to CS seeing other women experience labour pain in the facilities. “A girl became very sick at the time of having a normal delivery. Everyone got afraid after seeing it. I will not be able to tolerate it. Then the physician examined me and was having an angry mood. She said, “We are trying to have a normal delivery. Hmmm, if you all have so much problem and want to have caesarean delivery, then we will do it” - Elective CS patient 5.
Looking closely at the themes that emerge from the interviews with women who underwent emergency and elective CS, there is a dominance of the underlying anxiety among the patients making them consent for C-sections. In addition, the interviews with both the physicians and the patients demonstrate the limitations of the health system, leading to further constraints in their communication.
Integration of patient, physicians and health system factors
We have adapted and summarized the themes from the physician and patient interviews in Fig. 2 and call them as priming factors. Collectively, these ‘priming factors’ have dominated the context in which the decisions on the observed CS were made. Figure 3 provides a summary schematic representation of this flawed decision-making process for CS. This suggests the risk perception of the physician of the harm of not performing a CS, the anxiety and lack of trust of the patient in the willingness of physicians to perform normal vaginal deliveries, in the context of a constrained health system, are contributing to flawed CS decision-making in public sector hospitals of Bangladesh and hence driving the high CS rates.
Figure 2: Factors influencing CS decision-making - The priming factors
Figure 3: Factors directly impairing communication