Brazilian doctors' perspective on the second opinion strategy before a C-section
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2006 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Revista de Saúde Pública |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-89102006000200008 |
Resumo: | OBJECTIVE: To describe the opinion of doctors who participated in the Latin American Study on Cesarean section in Brazil regarding the second opinion strategy when faced with the decision of performing a C-section. METHODS: Seventy-two doctors from the hospitals where the study took place (where the second opinion was routinely sought) and 70 from the control group answered a pre-tested self-administered structured questionnaire. Descriptive tables were prepared based on the frequency of relevant variables on opinion of physicians regarding: effectiveness of the application of the second opinion strategy; on whether they would recommend implementation of this strategy and reasons for not recommending it in private institutions; feasibility of the strategy implementation and reasons for not considering this implementation feasible in private institutions. RESULTS: Half of the doctors from the intervention hospitals (50%) and about two thirds of those in the control group (65%) evaluated the second opinion as being or having the potential of being effective/very effective in their institutions. The great majority of those interviewed from both intervention and control hospitals considered this strategy feasible in public (87% and 95% respectively) but not in private hospitals (64% and 70% respectively), mainly because in the latter the doctors would not accept interference from a colleague in their decision-making process. CONCLUSION: Although the second opinion strategy was perceived as effective in reducing C-section rates, doctors did not regard it feasible outside the public health system in Brazil. |
id |
USP-23_a886acec2594e6edc0f58eb521114e7a |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S0034-89102006000200008 |
network_acronym_str |
USP-23 |
network_name_str |
Revista de Saúde Pública |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Brazilian doctors' perspective on the second opinion strategy before a C-sectionDelivery, obstetricsReferral and consultation/utilizationHealth knowledge, attitudes, practiceHospital, privativeHospital, publicC-sectionOBJECTIVE: To describe the opinion of doctors who participated in the Latin American Study on Cesarean section in Brazil regarding the second opinion strategy when faced with the decision of performing a C-section. METHODS: Seventy-two doctors from the hospitals where the study took place (where the second opinion was routinely sought) and 70 from the control group answered a pre-tested self-administered structured questionnaire. Descriptive tables were prepared based on the frequency of relevant variables on opinion of physicians regarding: effectiveness of the application of the second opinion strategy; on whether they would recommend implementation of this strategy and reasons for not recommending it in private institutions; feasibility of the strategy implementation and reasons for not considering this implementation feasible in private institutions. RESULTS: Half of the doctors from the intervention hospitals (50%) and about two thirds of those in the control group (65%) evaluated the second opinion as being or having the potential of being effective/very effective in their institutions. The great majority of those interviewed from both intervention and control hospitals considered this strategy feasible in public (87% and 95% respectively) but not in private hospitals (64% and 70% respectively), mainly because in the latter the doctors would not accept interference from a colleague in their decision-making process. CONCLUSION: Although the second opinion strategy was perceived as effective in reducing C-section rates, doctors did not regard it feasible outside the public health system in Brazil.Faculdade de Saúde Pública da Universidade de São Paulo2006-04-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-89102006000200008Revista de Saúde Pública v.40 n.2 2006reponame:Revista de Saúde Públicainstname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USP10.1590/S0034-89102006000200008info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessOsis,Maria José DuarteCecatti,José GuilhermePádua,Karla Simônia deFaúndes,Anibaleng2006-08-16T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0034-89102006000200008Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_serial&pid=0034-8910&lng=pt&nrm=isoONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phprevsp@org.usp.br||revsp1@usp.br1518-87870034-8910opendoar:2006-08-16T00:00Revista de Saúde Pública - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian doctors' perspective on the second opinion strategy before a C-section |
title |
Brazilian doctors' perspective on the second opinion strategy before a C-section |
spellingShingle |
Brazilian doctors' perspective on the second opinion strategy before a C-section Osis,Maria José Duarte Delivery, obstetrics Referral and consultation/utilization Health knowledge, attitudes, practice Hospital, privative Hospital, public C-section |
title_short |
Brazilian doctors' perspective on the second opinion strategy before a C-section |
title_full |
Brazilian doctors' perspective on the second opinion strategy before a C-section |
title_fullStr |
Brazilian doctors' perspective on the second opinion strategy before a C-section |
title_full_unstemmed |
Brazilian doctors' perspective on the second opinion strategy before a C-section |
title_sort |
Brazilian doctors' perspective on the second opinion strategy before a C-section |
author |
Osis,Maria José Duarte |
author_facet |
Osis,Maria José Duarte Cecatti,José Guilherme Pádua,Karla Simônia de Faúndes,Anibal |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Cecatti,José Guilherme Pádua,Karla Simônia de Faúndes,Anibal |
author2_role |
author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Osis,Maria José Duarte Cecatti,José Guilherme Pádua,Karla Simônia de Faúndes,Anibal |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Delivery, obstetrics Referral and consultation/utilization Health knowledge, attitudes, practice Hospital, privative Hospital, public C-section |
topic |
Delivery, obstetrics Referral and consultation/utilization Health knowledge, attitudes, practice Hospital, privative Hospital, public C-section |
description |
OBJECTIVE: To describe the opinion of doctors who participated in the Latin American Study on Cesarean section in Brazil regarding the second opinion strategy when faced with the decision of performing a C-section. METHODS: Seventy-two doctors from the hospitals where the study took place (where the second opinion was routinely sought) and 70 from the control group answered a pre-tested self-administered structured questionnaire. Descriptive tables were prepared based on the frequency of relevant variables on opinion of physicians regarding: effectiveness of the application of the second opinion strategy; on whether they would recommend implementation of this strategy and reasons for not recommending it in private institutions; feasibility of the strategy implementation and reasons for not considering this implementation feasible in private institutions. RESULTS: Half of the doctors from the intervention hospitals (50%) and about two thirds of those in the control group (65%) evaluated the second opinion as being or having the potential of being effective/very effective in their institutions. The great majority of those interviewed from both intervention and control hospitals considered this strategy feasible in public (87% and 95% respectively) but not in private hospitals (64% and 70% respectively), mainly because in the latter the doctors would not accept interference from a colleague in their decision-making process. CONCLUSION: Although the second opinion strategy was perceived as effective in reducing C-section rates, doctors did not regard it feasible outside the public health system in Brazil. |
publishDate |
2006 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2006-04-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-89102006000200008 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-89102006000200008 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/S0034-89102006000200008 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Faculdade de Saúde Pública da Universidade de São Paulo |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Faculdade de Saúde Pública da Universidade de São Paulo |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Revista de Saúde Pública v.40 n.2 2006 reponame:Revista de Saúde Pública instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP) instacron:USP |
instname_str |
Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
instacron_str |
USP |
institution |
USP |
reponame_str |
Revista de Saúde Pública |
collection |
Revista de Saúde Pública |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Revista de Saúde Pública - Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
revsp@org.usp.br||revsp1@usp.br |
_version_ |
1748936495108980736 |