Evidence Based Nursing Practice Project on Cesarean Sections

Evidence Based Nursing Practice Project on Cesarean Sections

The cesarean section is a procedure of giving birth, an alternative to the natural birth procedure. Previously, it was only done for the women who had complicated labor for various reasons, like small pelvic areas and other complicated medical situations. However, now things have changed and people choose the procedure over natural birth for material reasons. The procedure is not safe and neither is it affordable. As a result, there are many evidence-based nursing practice projects studying the procedure in a quest to explain it to the women better. The results of this research will change the current situation of misconceived information.

The national guideline or evidence-based systematic review that has been completed is on Elective Cesarean Sections. The purpose of the review was to inform the expectant mothers of the health risks that come with Cesarean Section way of delivering (Carolina, 2009). The study on this topic was conducted by nurses at the University of North Carolina where they wanted to discourage women from electing to have a cesarean section procedure when they can deliver naturally. The pain and complications that come with the cesarean section form of delivering are risky for both the children and the mother. 

The article on the Impact of Caesarean Section breastfeeding initiation, duration and difficulties in the first four months postpartum best supports the nursing interventions of the women planning on elective caesarian section on the benefits of breastfeeding their infants (Hobbs, Mannion, McDonald, Brockway, & Tough, 2009). According to this article, the women who go through elective Caesarian section rarely ever breast feed their infants. It also has the figures to support their facts. The cesarean section procedure should only be done as a last resort measure when natural labor endangers the mother’s life. The procedure should be conducted for those mothers who really have absolutely no option of natural birth.

All the five articles have one common sentiment, the cesarean section is a dangerous process of giving birth. The first article talks about the health risks that the women electing the procedure expose themselves. The children borne by this means are often weaker because most of them are delivered well ahead of their due dates. The second article highlights on the way the mothers who opt for this procedures do not get to breast feed their infants properly. The nurses find easier to train woman before they get to the point of preferring the procedure to natural birth. 

The article, “Strategies to Reduce Cesarean Birth in Low-Risk women had the most elaborate research design (Hartmann KE, 2012). The research was well stated right from the start and that made the research design more elaborate. The research was designed to be conducted in stages starting from the first time the expecting mother visits a prenatal care clinic all the way through labor and to the post natal period. The objectives of the research also made it an easier research to follow. The questions are clear and precise. The criteria of conducting the research is also well explained. With all these details in place, the research design of this study is proper and systematic. 

Reducing Length of Labor and Cesarean Surgery Rate Using a Peanut Ball for Women Laboring with an Epidural was the article with the best problem statement (Tussey, Botsios, Gerkin, Kelly, Gamez, & Mensik, 2015). The article details the reasons how the nurses can assist the laboring mothers to reduce the length of labor and ultimately the risk of being booked for surgery when natural birth fails. The problem statement now details how the natural labor fails stage by stage and ends up forcing the mother to undergo caesarean section procedure to save the mother and the child. The purpose of this study, therefore, was all about methods for reducing the eventualities of women ending up giving birth under the knife.

Reducing Length of Labor and Cesarean Surgery Rate Using a Peanut Ball for Women Laboring with an Epidural also had the best sample size. The explanation given in the abstract makes it easier for the research to be understood by a third party (Tussey, Botsios, Gerkin, Kelly, Gamez & Mensik 2015). The study has extensive information in their literature review to back their abstract which has the sample size that was derived from the women in a controlled sampling method. The reason for this is because the Peanut Ball was not available to all their respondents. This means that the people taking part in the study have to meet a set criteria, in this case, they have either used the Peanut Ball or not. Therefore, a sample size of 107 women who had used the Peanut ball together with 91 who had not used it, is a reasonable number in reaching a representative conclusion on its effectiveness.

The impact of caesarean section on breastfeeding initiation, duration and difficulties in the first four months postpartum has the most accurate conclusions from their findings. The numbers at the time were relevant to the state of the maternal health care system. The Canadian cesarean section was past the recommended rate by the World Health Organizations in 2009 at 27.1% instead of 15% maximum. This article had details researched properly and the information contained in the report could be considered reliable (Hobbs, Mannion, McDonald, Brockway, & Tough, 2009).

The five articles agree on one thing, the cesarean section procedure is a high risk birth process. It should only be used as a last resort birth method where the lives of the infant and the mother are at risk with natural birth (Ahrq, 2014). My personal analysis of the evidence-based systematic review does not quite agree with the current generation of new mothers who opt for cesarean section procedure when one can naturally give birth. It is important to note that the risks involved with the procedure surpass those of natural birth in as far as the health of both the child and the mother are concerned.

References

Ahrq, B. (2014, March 26). Evidence-Based Practice by Nurses for Nurses: Encouraging Waiting Spontaneous Labor. Retrieved from AllNurses: http://allnurses.com/ob-gyn-nursing/evidence-based-practice-914643.html

Carolina, N. a. (2009, December 31). Evidence-Based Practice for Elective C-Sections. Retrieved from Advance Healthcare network for nurses: http://nursing.advanceweb.com/article/evidence-based-practice-for-elective-c-sections.aspx?CP=2

Hartmann KE, A. J. (2012). Strategies To Reduce Cesarean Birth in Low-Risk Women. Rockvile: Agnecy for Healthcare Reasearch and Quality.

Hobbs, A. J., Mannion, C. A., McDonald, S. W., Brockway, M., & Tough, S. C. (2009). The impact of caesarean section on breastfeeding initiation, duration and difficulties in the first four months postpartum. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 16-90.

Tussey, C. M., Botsios, E., Gerkin, R. D., Kelly, L. A., Gamez, J., &Mensik, J. (2015). Reducing Length of Labor and Cesarean Surgery Rate Using a Peanut Ball for Women Laboring With an Epidural. The Journal of Perinatal Education, 24(1), 16–24. http://doi.org/10.1891/1058-1243.24.1.16