Exploring barriers and facilitators of vaginal birth after caesarean section (VBAC), awareness, and preferences among females in Western Saudi Arabia.

IF 1.1 Q4 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-13 DOI:10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_946_24
Daniyah Aloufi, Omar Saggaf, Zainab Ali Alkhalifah, Hassan Alalawi, Nadia Alhazmi
{"title":"Exploring barriers and facilitators of vaginal birth after caesarean section (VBAC), awareness, and preferences among females in Western Saudi Arabia.","authors":"Daniyah Aloufi, Omar Saggaf, Zainab Ali Alkhalifah, Hassan Alalawi, Nadia Alhazmi","doi":"10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_946_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Women with a history of previous Cesarean Sections (CS) are faced with two choices during their pregnancy: Vaginal Birth After Cesarean (VBAC) or Elective Repeat Cesarean Delivery (ERCD). VBAC refers to vaginal delivery in women who have previously undergone a CS.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Despite limited studies on VBAC in Saudi Arabia, this research aims to assess the knowledge and awareness of Saudi women regarding VBAC.</p><p><strong>Methodology: </strong>This cross-sectional study was conducted among adult females in Western Saudi Arabia utilizing a convenient snowball sampling technique. The total number of participants was 901 females. The participants completed a self-administered questionnaire, which covered general information, knowledge about VBAC, and factors influencing their decision. Statistical analysis employed Chi-squared, Independent T-Test, and ANOVA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our findings revealed that 67.5% of participants had inadequate knowledge about VBAC. Only 45.6% of participants were familiar with the term VBAC. The primary reason for choosing CS over VBAC was medical necessity, as reported by 36.3% of participants. The most common reasons for rejecting VBAC were fear for their child's safety and the fact that a CS was recommended, both reported by 35.1%. The lowest reported reason was external interference from family or spouses, at 10.5%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although the majority of our sample consisted of highly educated women, most exhibited poor knowledge regarding VBAC. Therefore, raising awareness about VBAC, especially through healthcare professionals and their clinics, is essential.</p>","PeriodicalId":15856,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care","volume":"14 1","pages":"139-148"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11844971/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_946_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Women with a history of previous Cesarean Sections (CS) are faced with two choices during their pregnancy: Vaginal Birth After Cesarean (VBAC) or Elective Repeat Cesarean Delivery (ERCD). VBAC refers to vaginal delivery in women who have previously undergone a CS.

Objectives: Despite limited studies on VBAC in Saudi Arabia, this research aims to assess the knowledge and awareness of Saudi women regarding VBAC.

Methodology: This cross-sectional study was conducted among adult females in Western Saudi Arabia utilizing a convenient snowball sampling technique. The total number of participants was 901 females. The participants completed a self-administered questionnaire, which covered general information, knowledge about VBAC, and factors influencing their decision. Statistical analysis employed Chi-squared, Independent T-Test, and ANOVA.

Results: Our findings revealed that 67.5% of participants had inadequate knowledge about VBAC. Only 45.6% of participants were familiar with the term VBAC. The primary reason for choosing CS over VBAC was medical necessity, as reported by 36.3% of participants. The most common reasons for rejecting VBAC were fear for their child's safety and the fact that a CS was recommended, both reported by 35.1%. The lowest reported reason was external interference from family or spouses, at 10.5%.

Conclusion: Although the majority of our sample consisted of highly educated women, most exhibited poor knowledge regarding VBAC. Therefore, raising awareness about VBAC, especially through healthcare professionals and their clinics, is essential.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
7.10%
发文量
884
审稿时长
40 weeks
期刊最新文献
Case report of familial hypercholesterolemia with internal carotid neck swelling. Health profile assessment of school children of Jodhpur District of Rajasthan. Surviving the edge: Strategies for maximizing recovery in near-hanging cases: A case series. Central obesity is a burden even in normal weight adolescents of a non-metropolitan Indian City: A case for alarm and action for prevention and control. Teenage pregnancy among adolescent girls in India.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1