Impact of legal regulation on elective cesarean sections in a secondary complexity maternity hospital in São Paulo state
Giulia Lopes Corte Mainardi, Vinicius Aniceto, João Vitor Zaniboni de Assumpção, Caio Antonio de Campos Prado, Ana Carolina Tagliatti Zani Mantovi, Elaine Christine Dantas Moisés

TL;DR
A new law in São Paulo allowing elective cesareans without medical reasons led to a rise in cesarean rates at a public hospital, with no major differences in complications.
Contribution
The study evaluates the real-world impact of a specific law on elective cesarean rates and associated outcomes in a public maternity hospital.
Findings
Cesarean section rates increased from 23.6% to 27.7% after the law was implemented.
15.1% of cesareans during the law period were performed under maternal request.
No significant differences in maternal or neonatal complications were found between elective and medically indicated cesareans.
Abstract
To evaluate the impact of São Paulo State Law n° 17.137/2019 on the cesarean section rate at a public secondary-level maternity hospital and to analyze predictive factors and complications associated with cesarean under request. This law was enacted to allow pregnant women in São Paulo to request a cesarean section without medical indication. This retrospective study analyzed medical records of pregnant women ≥ 39 weeks gestation attended at the Ribeirão Preto Women's Health Reference Center (CRSMRP-Mater). Two groups were evaluated: 1,999 patients before the law (July 2018–July 2019) and 3,207 after its implementation (August 2019–July 2021, excluding the suspension period). Descriptive and analytical statistical methods were applied. The overall cesarean rates increased significantly from 23.6% to 27.7% (p < 0.01), with 15,1% of cesareans during the law period being under maternal…
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
| Variables | Total | Law period | Pre-law period | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n/total(%) | n/total(%) | ||||
| Age (years) | 5,203 | 25.9 ± 6.1 | 25.6 ± 6.2 | 0.473 | |
| Number of Pregnancies | 5,203 | 2.1 ± 1.2 | 2.1 ± 1.2 | 0.405 | |
| Skin color | White | 5,187 | 1,915/3,192(60) | 1,384/1,995(69.4) | < 0.01 |
| Black or brown | 1,277/3,192(40) | 611/1,995(30.6) | |||
| Educational Level | 0 years | 5,156 | 9/3,169(0.3) | 6/1,987(0.3) | 0.78 |
| 1 to 8 years | 859/3,169(27.1) | 556/1,987(28) | |||
| 9 years or more | 2,301/3,169(72.6) | 1,425/1,987(71.7) | |||
| Marital status | Stable partner | 5,111 | 1,157/3,127(37) | 530/1,984(26.7) | < 0.01 |
| No stable partner | 1,970/3,127(63) | 1,454/1,984(73.3) | |||
| Occupation | With personal income | 5,165 | 1,282/3,174(40.4) | 731/1,991(36.4) | < 0.01 |
| Without personal income | 1,892/3,174(59.6) | 1,260/1,991(63.3) | |||
| Variables | Law period | Pre-law period | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| n/total(%) | n/total(%) | |||
| Previous cesarean | Yes | 529/3,207(16.5) | 325/1,996(16.3) | 0.84 |
| No | 2,678/3,207(83.5) | 1,671/1,996(83.7) | ||
| Diseases during pregnancy | Diabetes | 234/3,166(7.4) | 62/1,995(3.1) | < 0.01 |
| Hypertensive disorder | 304/3,166(9.6) | 44/1,995(2.2) | ||
| Other | 434/3,166(13.7) | 443/1,995(22.2) | ||
| No | 2194/3,166(69.3) | 1,446/1,995(72.5) | ||
| Prenatal care | Yes | 2,874/2,994(96) | 1,880/1,940(96.9) | 0.11 |
| No | 120/2,994(4) | 60/1,940(3.1) | ||
| Labor onset | Spontaneous | 2,070/3,205(64.6) | 1,335/1,992(67) | < 0.01 |
| Induced | 872/3,205(27.2) | 567/1,992(28.5) | ||
| Resolution by cesarean | 263/3,205(8.2) | 90/1,992(4.5) | ||
| Pharmacological labor analgesia | Yes | 1,373/3,207(42.8) | 790/1,991(39.7) | 0.03 |
| No | 1,834/3,207(57.2) | 1,201/1,991(60.3) | ||
| Delivery route | Cesarean before labor | 202/3,206(6.3) | 134/1,997(6.7) | < 0.01 |
| Cesarean after labor onset | 548/3,206(17.1) | 293/1,997(14.7) | ||
| Elective cesarean | 138/3,206(4.3) | 44/1,997(2.2) | ||
| Vaginal delivery | 2,318/3,206(72.3) | 1,526/1,997(76.4) | ||
| Indication for cesarean | Under request | 37/888(4.2) | 0/471(0) | < 0.01 |
| Other indication | 851/888(95.8) | 471/471(100) | ||
| Birth weight | ≤ 2500g | 35/3,166(1.1) | 40/1,986(2) | 0.05 |
| 2501 a 3999g | 2,935/3,166(92.7) | 1,827/1,986(92) | ||
| > 3999g | 196/3,166(6.2) | 119/1,986(6) | ||
| Vitality at birth | Alive | 3,193/3,196(99.9) | 1,993/1,993(100) | 0.11 |
| Deceased | 3/3,196(0,1) | 0/1,993(0) | ||
| Apgar score in 5th minute | 0 to 3 | 6/3,068(0.2) | 2/1,976(0.1) | 0.63 |
| 4 to 7 | 61/3,068(2) | 34/1,976(1.7) | ||
| 8 to 10 | 3,001/3,068(97.8) | 1,940/1,976(98.2) | ||
| Postpartum hemorrhage | Yes | 346/3,204(10.8) | 168/1,995(8.4) | < 0.01 |
| No | 2,858/3,204(89.2) | 1,827/1,995(91.6) | ||
| Hospitalization time | ≤ 2 days | 2,165/3,203(67.6) | 1,460/1,995(73.2) | < 0.01 |
| > 2 days | 1,038/3,203(32.4) | 535/1,995(26.8) | ||
| Re-hospitalization | Yes | 83/3,204(2.6) | 50/1,995(2.5) | 0.76 |
| No | 3,121/3,204(97.4) | 1,945/1,995(97.5) | ||
| Reason for | Related to childbirth | 18/83(21.7) | 9/44(20.4) | 0.87 |
| Not related to childbirth | 65/83(78.3) | 35/44(79.6) | ||
| Variables | Cesarean under request | Medically indicated cesarean | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Skin color | White | 82/132(62.1) | 459/749(61.3) | 0.85 |
| Brown or Black | 50/132(37.9) | 280/749(37.8) | ||
| Educational level | 0 years | 0/133(0) | 3/743(0.1) | 0.51 |
| 1 to 8 years | 24/133(18.1) | 163/743(22.2) | ||
| 9 to 13 years | 109/133(81.9) | 577/743(77.7) | ||
| Marital status | Stable partner | 60/133(45.1) | 270/738(36.6) | 0.06 |
| No stable partner | 73/133(54.9) | 468/738(63.4) | ||
| Occupation | With personal income | 61/134(45.5) | 361/742(48.6) | 0.50 |
| Without personal income | 73/134(54.5) | 381/742(51.4) | ||
| Variables | Cesarean by maternal request | Cesarean by medical indication | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Previous cesarean | Yes | 70/134(52.2) | 187/754(24.8) | < 0.01 |
| No | 64/134(47.8) | 567/754(75.2) | ||
| Diseases during pregnancy | Diabetes | 16/130(12.3) | 63/746(8.6) | 0.48 |
| Hypertensive disorder | 14/130(10.8) | 101/746(13.5) | ||
| Other | 16/130(12.3) | 94/746(12.6) | ||
| No | 84/130(64.6) | 488/746(65.4) | ||
| Prenatal care | Yes | 127/130(97.7) | 697/710(98.17) | 0.71 |
| No | 3/130(2.3) | 13/710(1.83) | ||
| Labor onset | Spontaneous | 57/134(42.6) | 207/753(27.5) | < 0.01 |
| Induced | 44/134(32.8) | 239/753(31.7) | ||
| Resolution by Cesarean | 33/134(24.6) | 307/753(40.8) | ||
| Pre-labor analgesia | Yes | 65/134(48.5) | 373/754(49.5) | 0.84 |
| No | 69/134(51.5) | 381/754(50.5) | ||
| Vitality at birth | Alive | 133/134(99.2) | 751/753(99.7) | 0.38 |
| Deceased | 1/134(0.8) | 2/753(0.3) | ||
| Apgar score at 5th minute | 0 to 3 | 0/124(0) | 4/733(0.5) | 0.10 |
| 4 to 7 | 0/124(0) | 22/733(3) | ||
| 8 to 10 | 124/124(100) | 707/733(96.5) | ||
| Postpartum hemorrhage | Yes | 22/134(16.4) | 114/753(15.1) | 0.71 |
| No | 112/134(83.6) | 639/753(84.9) | ||
| Fever postpartum | Yes | 1/134(0.7) | 17/751(2.3) | 0.25 |
| No | 133/134(99.3) | 734/751(97.7) | ||
| Hospitalization time | ≤ 2 days | 77/134(57.5) | 369/752(49.1) | 0.07 |
| > 2 days | 57/134(42.5) | 383/752(50.9) | ||
| Re-hospitalization | Yes | 6/134(4.5) | 27/752(3.6) | 0.62 |
| No | 128/134(95.5) | 725/752(96.4) | ||
| Reason for | Related to childbirth | 3/6(50) | 15/27(55.6) | 0.81 |
| Not related to childbirth | 3/6(50) | 12/27(44.4) | ||
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions · Global Maternal and Child Health · Reproductive Health and Contraception
Introduction
Although the cesarean section is a surgical procedure intended to reduce maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality, it presents both immediate and long-term risks. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that cesarean rates not exceed 15%, as higher rates have not demonstrated a positive impact on the perinatal mortality rates.^(1)^ However, considering the Brazilian population characteristics, the adjusted cesarean rate recommended by the Brazilian Ministry of Health, based on an instrument developed by WHO, is 25-30%.^(2)^ Despite this, Brazil faces alarming rates, reaching up to 55% in the Unified Health System (SUS) and up to 90% in the private sector, reflecting a real epidemic of surgical births.^(3)^
Medical indications for cesarean delivery include labor dystocia, fetal vitality disorders, cephalopelvic disproportion, abnormal fetal presentations, multiple pregnancies, some infections, certain maternal diseases, and placental disorders, as outlined by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG).^(4)^ However, a growing phenomenon is the maternal requested cesarean, driven by factors such as labor pain, anxiety, and previous childbirth experiences.^(5)^ Studies show that fear of childbirth can lead women to demand a cesarean even in the absence of medical indications, increasing the likelihood of unnecessary surgical interventions.^(6–8)^
In this context, São Paulo State Law No. 17.137/2019,^(9)^ which authorizes cesarean sections at the request of pregnant women with at least 39 weeks of pregnancy, has brought to light issues regarding maternal autonomy and healthcare professionals responsibility of informing about the risks and benefits of different delivery routes.^(4)^ Therefore, understanding the factors that lead pregnant women to choose cesarean deliveries is essential, as this choice impacts not only individual health but also the healthcare system as a whole.^(10)^
Thus, this study wanted to analyze the prevalence of cesareans under maternal request, their predictive factors, and obstetric outcomes at a secondary complexity maternity hospital, the Ribeirão Preto's Women Health Reference Center - MATER (CRSMRP-MATER). This analysis was conducted considering the context of the implementation of São Paulo State Law No. 17.137/2019,^(9)^ aiming to evaluate its impact and to contribut to a broader understanding of maternal requested cesareans and their implications for public health.
Methods
This was a retrospective study including a convenience sample of pregnant women with a gestational age of 39 weeks and beyond assisted at the "Ribeirão Preto Women's Health Reference Center - MATER" (CRSMRP-MATER), between July 1, 2018, and July 31, 2019 (previously to São Paulo State Law No. 17.137/2019 effectiveness), and from August 23, 2019, to July 31, 2021 (after the enactment of the mentioned law), for comparison of cesarean delivery rates. Pregnant women assisted between July 1, 2020, and June 30, 2021, were excluded from the sample due to the law's suspension during this period, since the study aimed to analyze precisely the law's effects. CRSMRP-MATER is a public service with a secondary maternity ward to provide medical care for patients from the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS), with a monthly average of 180 deliveries.
To analyze predictive factors associated with cesarean sections requested by the parturient, a new sample was studied, including pregnant women with a gestational age of 39 weeks or more, during the law's effectiveness period. Then, patients who had cesarean section upon their request were compared to those who had cesarean due to an obstetric indication.
Data were obtained from electronic medical records of the patients, including information on age, skin color, occupation, marital status, educational level, obstetric history, labor evolution, and delivery outcomes (onset, patient preferences, delivery route, and obstetric outcomes). Data were anonymized and stored securely on the Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) platform, hosted by the Medical School of Ribeirao Preto, from the University of Sao Paulo (FMRP-USP), with restricted access to researchers.
The primary outcome evaluated was the change in the cesarean section rate regarding the pre-law and law-period groups. Secondarily, the predictive factors and the complications related to cesarean under request were analyzed within the group during the law period.
Statistical analysis included an exploratory evaluation of data with absolute and relative frequencies for qualitative variables and measures of central tendency and dispersion for quantitative variables. The chi-square test was used for categorical variables and the Student's t-test or Wilcoxon test for continuous variables, depending on the data distribution. All analyses were conducted using SAS software version 9.4.
Since the study used secondary data from medical records without interfering in obstetric management, it was exempt from obtaining informed consent. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Ribeirao Preto Clinical Hospital (HCRP), and by the Research Commission of CRSMRP-MATER 5.439.837 (Certificado de Apresentação de Apreciação Ética (CAAE): 58799621.1.0000.5440).
Results
A total of 5,206 patients were included, with all deliveries performed during the specified period at the hospital and divided into two groups: 1,999 in the pre-law period (all deliveries between July 1, 2018, and July 31, 2019) and 3,207 in the law period (all deliveries between August 23, 2019, and July 31, 2021, excluding the law's suspension period).
In both groups, the median age and parity were 25 years and two pregnancies, respectively. The sociodemographic evaluation revealed a predominance of white patients with an educational level of at least nine years of study, no stable marital relationship, no personal income, and no pre-existing diseases in both groups (Table 1). Despite these similarities, in the pre-law period there were a significantly higher proportion of white patients (p < 0.01), patients without a stable marital relationship (p < 0.01), and those without personal income (p < 0.01).
Both groups were homogeneous regarding the presence of a previous cesarean section, prenatal care, number of fetuses (all were single pregnancies), birth weight, and vitality at birth (Table 2). Although both groups predominantly consisted of healthy pregnant women, the proportion of pregnant women with comorbidities, particularly hypertension and diabetes, was significantly higher in the law period (p < 0.01). Regarding the primary outcome, there was a significant increase in the cesarean rate of the institution, rising from 23.6% during the pre-law period to 27.7% in the law period (p < 0.01). As for the main complications evaluated, the rate of postpartum hemorrhage was similar between the groups, and also was the need for re-hospitalization, which occurred in less than 3.0% of both groups, with most of these cases unrelated to childbirth (e.g., re-hospitalization for newborn phototherapy). The length of hospitalization was significantly longer in the law period (p < 0.01), possibly related to the higher proportion of cesareans in this group (p < 0.01).
A total of 134 patients in the law period had cesarean deliveries under request, representing 4,2% of all deliveries and 15,1% of all cesareans done during this period. In subsequent analyses, this subgroup of women with cesarean deliveries under request was compared to women with medically indicated cesarean deliveries. Within these comparisons, no sociodemographic differences were observed between the subgroups, and the sample characteristics remained consistent: a predominance of white women, with at least nine years of education, no stable marital relationship, and no personal income (Table 3).
During the evaluation of obstetric and perinatal outcomes during the law period (Table 4), it was observed that both subgroups (cesarean by maternal request and cesarean by medical indication) were similar in terms of healthy pregnant women predominance, and good adherence to prenatal care. No differences were found regarding the rate of intrapartum pharmacological analgesia between the subgroups. However, there was a higher occurrence of cesarean deliveries before the onset of labor in the maternal requested cesarean subgroup (p < 0.01), as well as a predominance of women with one or more previous cesareans (p < 0.01). Finally, there were no differences between these subgroups regarding neonatal vitality, length of hospitalization, and perinatal complications.
Discussion
Although it was expected, the present study objectively demonstrated that the implementation of São Paulo State Law No. 17.137/2019 coincided with a significant increase in the overall rate of cesareans at CRSMRP-MATER. Among the women who had cesarean deliveries under request, the majority (52.2%) had a previous cesarean, which was the only factor identified in this study as being associated with the maternal request for a new cesarean delivery. This finding is consistent with other studies showing that younger women and those with a history of cesarean delivery are more likely to choose this delivery route again.^(3)^ Nonetheless, the rate of cesareans under maternal request at CRSMRP-Mater in 2022 was relatively low, accounting for only 4.5% of all cesarean deliveries.
When it comes to maternal preferred delivery route, cesarean is chosen by 27% of the Brazilian pregnant women in the public sector, and by 44% in the private sector.^(3)^ All over the world, reasons for requesting a cesarean section include labor pain, anxiety about fetal distress or death, fear of vaginal delivery, urinary incontinence, pelvic floor and vaginal tearing, medical suggestion, timing of delivery, negative previous birth experiences, previous infertility, anxiety about gynecological exams, fear of losing control, desire to avoid prolonged labor, anxiety due to lack of support from the healthcare providers, fear of fecal aspects, emotional factors, estimated fetal weight, and abnormal prenatal tests.^(5)^ It is important to note that when fear of childbirth is not addressed, the likelihood of requesting a cesarean section may increase up to 5.2 times.^(11,12)^ This can lead to unnecessary surgery and expose the patient to avoidable risks.^(13,14)^
In Brazil, the main factors justifying the preference for cesarean section are maternal convenience and fear of pain, with the latter being the primary cause of fear of childbirth as a whole.^(2,15)^ A contributing factor is also the lack of information among Brazilian pregnant women about delivery routes, which hinders their understanding of the risks and benefits of both cesarean and vaginal birth.^(11)^ Additionally, there has been historically a disparity in obstetric care between the public and private sectors. In the context of private healthcare, cesarean sections are predominantly performed, often due to maternal desire. In contrast, although the cesarean rates in the public health system are high, they are more restrained, as parturients did not have full autonomy to choose their mode of delivery until now.^(16)^ In this sense, the justification for São Paulo State Law No. 17.137/2019^(9)^ is based on the goal of providing greater autonomy to pregnant women, aiming to promote horizontal relationships between doctors and patients. Although this is a valid objective, the argument behind this law did not consider aspects related to the risks of surgical complications and the impact of unnecessary cesarean sections on the reproductive future of patients, as literature shows higher risks of severe maternal morbidity, maternal mortality, and neonatal respiratory morbidity related to the cesarean, as well placental abnormalities in subsequent pregnancies.^(17–20)^ Finally, while the law assumes that the costs of vaginal and cesarean deliveries are similar in the healthcare system, the literature demonstrates that the average cost of a cesarean section is 32% higher than the cost of a vaginal birth, including the length of stay in the maternity ward after each procedure.^(2)^
The initial revocation of São Paulo State Law No. 17.137/2019^(9)^ and its subsequent reinstatement by the Federal Supreme Court reveals the complexity of the ethical and legal considerations surrounding its implementation. While the law was enacted to safeguard a woman's right to exercise full autonomy in selecting her mode of delivery, this decision must be informed and supported by robust scientific evidence exploring the safety and risks associated with both options. To achieve this, health education must be prioritized to provide pregnant women with clear and comprehensive information regarding the implications of their choices.^(21,22)^
In this sense, a study conducted at another institution in the city of Ribeirão Preto-SP revealed that 48% of births were cesarean deliveries, of which 44.6% were performed due to maternal request.^(23)^ This contrasts with the rates found in the present study, which were 27.7% and 15.1%, respectively. It is noteworthy that CRSMRP-MATER has been actively engaged in health education and awareness for pregnant women, especially those who express a desire for cesarean during prenatal care. The goal of this initiative is to understand the reasons behind this choice, to equip women with evidence-based information translated into accessible language, enabling them to identify and deconstruct unfounded fears and expectations, and consequently to make truly informed decisions. As a result, many patients end up renouncing their initial desire, which contributes to the reduction of cesarean rates without obstetric reason.
Nonetheless, medical factors must also be considered when analyzing cesarean rates. The presence of gestational diseases was significantly higher in the group that gave birth after the enactment of the law, the one with a higher proportion of cesarean deliveries, raising the question of whether these conditions influenced the decision to undergo the surgery. Literature suggests that the presence of comorbidities may increase the perceived risk associated with vaginal delivery, leading to a preference for cesarean delivery.^(4)^ However, the decision for cesarean delivery in the absence of a medical indication exposes pregnant women to unnecessary risks, such as surgical complications, longer hospitalization, and increased maternal and neonatal morbidity.
In parallel, while the group from the law period had higher rates of pharmacological analgesia and cesarean deliveries than the one from the period before the law, the literature is clear in demonstrating that the use of pharmacological analgesia does not lead to increased cesarean rates.^(24)^ Thus, considering that the institution provides pharmacological analgesia freely to all parturients, even before the enactment of the law, and that no differences were observed in analgesia rates between patients with maternal requested cesareans and those with medically indicated cesareans, the higher cesarean rate in the law period can be better explained by the law itself, that allowed cesarean delivery upon request.
Finally, it is known that cesarean delivery is linked to short- and long-term risks for both mothers and newborns, including higher maternal morbidity, neonatal respiratory issues, and NICU admissions.^(25,26)^ Long-term maternal risks involve complications in future pregnancies, while children face increased chances of asthma and obesity.^(27,28)^ Despite of this, no differences were observed in the rates of short-term postpartum complications studied between the maternal requested cesarean subgroup and the medically indicated cesarean subgroup in this sample.
Despite the relevance of the findings, it is essential to acknowledge the strengths and limitations of the present study. Among the strengths of this study is the use of a comprehensive and representative institutional database, with detailed information on deliveries performed over one year at a public secondary maternity hospital. This enabled the identification of relevant patterns associated with cesarean under request and increasing in the cesarean rate of the studied healthcare service.
However, the study has its limitations, including the retrospective design and reliance on the accuracy of medical records. Furthermore, as it was conducted in a single center, the findings may not be generalizable to other populations or hospital settings.
Conclusion
The analysis of the impact of São Paulo State Law No. 17.137/2019 in a secondary complexity maternity hospital in São Paulo revealed an alarming increase in cesarean rates. Although no increment in complications related to maternal-requested cesareans was observed compared to medically indicated cesareans, the study demonstrated higher rates of postpartum hemorrhage and longer hospitalization times in the law period, with a predominance of cesareans compared to vaginal births. Given the complexity of the issue, it is essential to gain a better understanding of the surgical birth choice and its impact on the healthcare system, which will be possible through future studies, particularly prospective ones. Thus, only with more information will healthcare teams be able to define better strategies to attempt to reduce cesarean birth rates in Brazil.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS) Declaração da OMS sobre Taxas de Cesáreas Genebra OMS 2015[cited 2024 Nov 13]Available from: https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/161442/WHO_RHR_15.02_por.pdf?sequence=3
- 2Brasil Ministério da Saúde. Comissão Nacional de Incorporação de Tecnologias no SUS (CONITEC). Diretriz de atenção à gestante: a operação cesariana Brasília (DF)Ministério da Saúde 2016
- 3Reiter M Betrán AP Marques FK Torloni MR Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on delivery preferences in Brazil Int J Gynaecol Obstet 20181431243110.1002/ijgo.1257029920679 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 4American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Cesarean birth ACOG 2023[cited 2024 Nov 13]Available from: https://www.acog.org/patient-resources/faqs/labor-delivery-and-postpartum-care/cesarean-birth
- 5Jenabi E Khazaei S Bashirian S Aghababaei S Matinnia N Reasons for elective cesarean section on maternal request: a systematic review J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 202033223867387210.1080/14767058.2019.158740730810436 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 6Saisto T Halmesmäki E Fear of childbirth: a neglected dilemma Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 200382320120812694113 · pubmed ↗
- 7Wax JR Cartin A Pinette MG Blackstone J Patient choice cesarean: an evidence-based review Obstet Gynecol Surv 200459860161610.1097/01.ogx.0000133942.76239.5715277895 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
- 8Imakawa CS Nadai MN Reis M Quintana SM Moises EC Is it necessary to evaluate fear of childbirth in pregnant women? A scoping review Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet 202244769270010.1055/s-0042-175106235767998 PMC 10032056 · doi ↗ · pubmed ↗
