• Jennifer M Wu, Andrew F Hundley, and Anthony G Visco.
• Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7570, USA. jmwu@med.unc.edu
• Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Feb 1;105(2):301-6.

ObjectiveTo compare the attitudes of urogynecology and maternal-fetal medicine specialists in the United States regarding elective primary cesarean delivery.MethodsA Web-based questionnaire was sent by e-mail to members of the American Urogynecologic Society (AUGS) and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM) who reside in the United States. The first e-mail was sent in October 2003, and 2 additional e-mails were sent to nonresponders over the next month. The survey included questions about demographics, practice patterns, and opinions about different clinical scenarios regarding elective primary cesarean delivery.ResultsOf 1,479 surveys sent to functioning e-mail addresses, 782 were completed (52.9% response rate). American Urogynecologic Society and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine members were similar in response rate (53.0% versus 52.8%, respectively). Overall, 65.4% of physicians would perform an elective cesarean delivery, but AUGS members were significantly more likely to agree to perform an elective cesarean than SMFM members (80.4% versus 55.4%, respectively, P < .001). In a logistic regression model that included age, sex, having no children, years in practice, and subspecialty (urogynecology or maternal-fetal medicine), AUGS members were 3.4 times (95% confidence interval 2.3-4.9, P < .001) more likely to agree to perform an elective cesarean.ConclusionAmong respondents, a majority of urogynecology and maternal-fetal medicine specialists surveyed would perform an elective primary cesarean delivery. Urogynecologists were significantly more likely to support elective cesareans.Level Of EvidenceII-3.

33 keywords...

hide…