Running Head: LITERATURE REVIEW 1
Running Head: LITERATURE REVIEW 1
“Literature Review”
LITERATURE REVIEW 2
Introduction
The PICOT question that was formulated for this Evidence-Based Practice Problem was
“For expectant mothers, how does cesarean delivery compare to normal child delivery result in
excessive blood loss after birth?” The population (P) is expectant mothers. The Intervention (I) is
C-Section Delivery. Comparison © is the comparison between C-Section and normal delivery.
The Outcome (O) is excessive blood loss. The Time Frame (T) is the period after birth. Pregnant
women who are operated to deliver their babies are exposed to certain health risks such as
excessive blood loss. In recent years, birth through C-Section has become more common.
Review of the Literature from the Three Articles
Article 1: The first article is one by Tommy published in 2018. The article is titled
“C-section – benefits, and risks.” The concepts explored in the study are the “benefits and risks of
C-Section deliveries”. Some of the advantages of C-Section include reducing the risk of pain
during the delivery process, vaginal injuries, “loss of bladder control”, “pelvic organ prolapse”,
and excessive bleeding. The possible risks of having a C-Section include womb infections, heart
attack, birth complications, and problems with future pregnancies. The process can also
negatively affect the baby. The method used in the study was a review of secondary sources such
as journals, books, and peer-reviewed articles.
Article 2: The second article is one by Escobar published in 2017. The title of the article
is “Why C-section rates are so high.” The concepts explored in the study are possible factors that
lead to a high rate of C-Section deliveries. The main cause for the high rate of C-Section
deliveries according to the article is unnecessary C-section deliveries for women who are at low
LITERATURE REVIEW 3
risk of complications. The method used in the study was a review of secondary sources such as
books, magazines, and journals. According to Escobar, C-section accounts for about 33% of all
the births that happen in America. This percentage is relatively high.
Article 3: The third article is one by the World Health Organization published in 2015.
The title of the article is “WHO statement on cesarean section rates.” The concepts explored in
the study are the position of WHO on the increased cesarean section rates. According to WHO,
the natural method of delivery should be through the vaginal canal unless the situation dictates
otherwise. In its statement, the WHO proposed the use of “The Robson classification” as a way
to monitor and compare the rates of Caesarean sections. The proposed system can compare and
analyze the rates of c-sections in different facilities and in different countries and regions. The
aim to curb the unnecessary performance of c-sections during delivery. The needs of the patient
should always be put first. Medical practitioners should not focus on the profits gained from
performing the c-section procedure. The best interest of the patient should be their main concern.
Conclusion
The debate on how cesarean section deliveries compare to normal child deliveries
continues to raise a lot of questions on the benefits and risks of both and which method is the
most recommended. The cesarean section procedures should only be done where necessary
because of the risks they pose to the mother and her baby. Women should also educate
themselves about labor and delivery prior to delivery.
LITERATURE REVIEW 4
REFERENCES
C-section – benefits and risks. (2018, April 24). Tommy’s.
https://www.tommys.org/pregnancy-information/labour-birth/caesarean-section/c-section
-benefits-and-risks
Escobar, N. (2017, September 15). Why C-section rates are so high. TheBump.com – Pregnancy,
Parenting, and Baby Information. https://www.thebump.com/a/c-section-rate-problems.
WHO. (2015, April 10). WHO statement on cesarean section rates. WHO | World Health
Organization.
https://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/maternal_perinatal/faq-cs-section/en/
