SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Doğu Karadeniz Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi / 2025 / Cilt: 4 Sayı: 4

Preferences of Primigravida Women for Mode of Delivery in Şanlıurfa And Related Factors

Doğurganlığın En Yüksek Olduğu İlde Primigravida Kadınların Doğum Şekline Yönelik Tercihleri ve Etkili Olan Faktörler

Hatice Nur Özgen(HARRAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-9252-0385
Fatma Koruk(HARRAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-2984-3776
Pages
257–272
Publication Date
2025-11-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Additionally, employment status, ethnicity, and maternal health conditions significantly influence delivery preferences.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: This study aimed to determine primigravida women's delivery mode preferences and the influencing factors in the province with the highest fertility rate.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material-method: This descriptive study was conducted between December 2024 and January 2025.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Additionally, employment status, ethnicity, and maternal health conditions significantly influence delivery preferences.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2024 Verileri
⚙️Variables:: Primigravida · kadın · doğum şekli tercihi

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to determine primigravida women's delivery mode preferences and the influencing factors in the province with the highest fertility rate. Material-method: This descriptive study was conducted between December 2024 and January 2025. The study population consisted of primiparous women who visited a public hospital for prenatal check-ups. The sample size was determined as 128 based on pilot study data. Data were collected through face-to-face interviews using a Personal Information Form, the Scale of Traumatic Childbirth Perception), and the Self-Efficacy Regarding Vaginal Birth Scale. Descriptive statistics such as percentages, means, and standard deviations were used for data analysis. Additionally, chi-square tests and Mann-Whitney U tests were applied for univariate analysis. Results: The mean age was 23.31±4.35 years and 60.9% of them had primary education or less. 85.2% of women are not engaged in income-generating activities, 59.4% were of Arabic or Kurdish ethnicity, and 18% have maternal health problems. The mean score of Scale of Traumatic Childbirth Perception was 81.14±26.4 and the mean score of Self-Efficacy Regarding Vaginal Birth Scale was 57.16±18.01. Factors influencing women's delivery preferences included employment status, ethnicity, and maternal health conditions (p<0.05). Conclusion: The province with the highest fertility rate, primigravida women have a high preference for vaginal delivery. Additionally, employment status, ethnicity, and maternal health conditions significantly influence delivery preferences.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, doğurganlık oranının en yüksek olduğu ilde primigravida kadınların doğum şekli tercihlerini ve etkileyen faktörleri belirlemektir. Materyal-metod: Araştırmanın evrenini, bir kamu hastanesine gebelik kontrolleri için başvuran primipar kadınlar oluşturmuştur. Örneklem büyüklüğü, pilot çalışmadan elde edilen verilerle 128 olarak hesaplanmıştır. Veriler, Kişisel Bilgi Formu, Travmatik Doğum Algısı Ölçeği ve Normal Doğuma Yönelik Öz-Yeterlilik Ölçeği kullanılarak yüz yüze görüşme yöntemi ile toplanmıştır. Verilerin analizinde, tanımlayıcı istatistiklerden yüzde, ortalama, standart sapma; tek değişkenli analizlerden, Ki-kare Testi ve Mann Whitney U testi kullanılmıştır. Bulgular: Araştırmaya katılan kadınların yaş ortalaması 23,31±4,35’tir ve %60,9’u okur-yazar değildir. Kadınların %85,2’si gelir getiren bir işte çalışmamakta, %59,4’ü Arap ve Kürt etnik kökenine sahip ve %18’inin maternal sağlık sorunu bulunmaktadır. Travmatik Doğum Algısı Ölçeği puan ortalaması 81.14±26.4 ve Normal Doğuma İlişkin Öz Yeterlilik Ölçeği puan ortalaması 57.16±18.01'dir. Kadınların doğum şekli tercihlerinde, çalışma durumu, etnik köken ve maternal sağlık sorunu etkili faktörlerdir (p<0.05). Sonuç: Doğurganlığın en yüksek olduğu ilde, primigravida kadınların vajinal doğum tercihin yüksek olduğunu, doğum şekli tercihlerinde, çalışma durumu, etnik köken ve maternal sağlık sorununun etkili faktörler olduğunu göstermiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Özgen, H. N., Koruk, F. (2025). Preferences of Primigravida Women for Mode of Delivery in Şanlıurfa And Related Factors. Doğu Karadeniz Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 4 Sayı: 4, 257–272. https://doi.org/10.59312/ebshealth.1709868

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (42)

  1. Aktaş, S. (2018). Multigravidas' perceptions of traumatic childbirth: Its relation to some factors, the effect of previous type of birth and experience. Medicine Science, 7, 203-209. https://doi.org/10.5455/medscience.2017.06.8728
  2. Ayers, S. (2014). Fear of childbirth, postnatal post-traumatic stress disorder and midwifery care. Midwifery, 30(2), 145–148. DOI: 10.1016/j.midw.2013.12.001
  3. Barut, S., & Uçar T (2018). Relationship between childbirth self-efficacy and fear of childbirth. Mersin University Journal of Health Sciences, 11(2), 107-115. https://doi.org/10.26559/mersinsbd.331077
  4. Bedir, N., Ekerbiçer, H., Köse, E., Köse, O., & Demirbaş, M. (2023). The preferred and actual delivery types of nulliparous pregnant women. ESTUDAM Public Health Journal, 8(2), 174-182. https://doi.org/10.35232/estudamhsd.1186331
  5. Bülez, A., Okyay, E. K., Sever, E., Bolat, A., & Kürklü, A. (2023). The effect of perinatal care satisfaction on the perception of traumatic birth in migrant and non-migrant women. Journal of Social Sciences of Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University, 20(2), 483-495. https://doi.org/10.33437/ksusbd.1348141
  6. Chu, K. H., Chen, A. C., Tai, C. J., Chen, S. F., & Chien, L. Y. (2017). Development and validation of the self-efficacy regarding vaginal birth scale. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, and Neonatal Nursing, 46(1), e13–e21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogn.2016.08.010
  7. Düzbayır, E., Karadeniz, H., & Süzer Özkan, F. (2023). The relationship between self-perception of pregnant and vaginal birth self-efficacy. Balıkesir Health Sciences Journal, 12(1), 160-168. https://doi.org/10.53424/balikesirsbd.1038623
  8. Elkin, N. (2016). Preferred mode of delivery and the related factors in women aged 18–49 years who applied to a family health center. Anatolian Clinic the Journal of Medical Sciences, 21(2). https://doi.org/10.21673/anadoluklin.180736
  9. Ergöl, Ş., & Kürtüncü, M. (2014). Factors affecting women’s preferences for cesarean birth in a university hospital. Journal of Hacettepe University Faculty of Nursing, 1(3), 26-34. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/hunhemsire/issue/7857/103393
  10. Eroğlu, K., Güner, P., Eroğlu, E., & Çetinkaya, F. (2021). Women’s reproductive behaviour and perspectives on fertility, and their modifying factors, in a Turkish province with a high fertility rate. The European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care, 26(1), 42–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/13625187.2020.1857355
  11. Gemeda Gudeta, T., Benti Terefe, A., Muhamed, A. N., Mengistu, G. T., & Abebe Sori, S. (2023). Perceived childbirth self-efficacy and its associated factors among pregnant women in South-Central Ethiopia. International Journal of Women's Health, 15, 1431–1442. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S423784
  12. Gholami, A., Faraji, Z., Lotfabadi, P., Foroozanfar, Z., Rezaof, M., & Rajabi, A. (2014). Factors associated with preference for repeat cesarean in neyshabur pregnant women. International journal of preventive medicine, 5(9), 1192–1198.
  13. Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies. (2019). 2018 Turkey Demographic and Health Survey. Ankara, Turkey: Presidency of the Republic of Turkey, Strategy and Budget Directorate, and TÜBİTAK. https://hips.hacettepe.edu.tr/en/2018_turkey_demographic_and_health_survey-198
  14. Hacıvelioğlu, D., & Bolsoy, N. (2020). Investigation of the birth experiences and birth perceptions of three generations of women: rural example of western anatolia. Gümüşhane University Journal of Health Science, 9(2), 67-81. https://doi.org/10.37989/gumussagbil.672954
  15. Kahraman, A., & Alparslan, Ö. (2022). A cross-cultural scale adaptation study; self-efficacy regarding vaginal birth scale. Journal of TOGU Health Sciences, 2(3), 238-249. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/2356547
  16. Kalyan, S. S. G., Bhardwaj, G., Shafqat, N., & Verma, M. (2024). Preferences and factors determining preferences for mode of delivery among primigravida mothers. Journal Of Family Medicine And Primary Care, 13(4), 1517–1523. https://doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1365_23
  17. Karabulutlu, Ö. (2012). Identifying the women`s choice of delivery methods of and the factors that affect them. Florence Nightingale Journal of Nursing, 20(3), 210-218. https://fnjn.org/en/identifying-the-women-s-choice-of-delivery-methods-of-and-the-factors-that-affect-them-13783
  18. Karadeniz, H., & Kavlak, O. (2024). Validity and reliability of the turkish version of the self-efficacy regarding vaginal birth scale: a methodological study. Value in Health Sciences, 14(3), 416-424. https://doi.org/10.33631/sabd.1426878
  19. Koruk, F., Beyazgül, B., & Koruk, İ. (2023). The effect of gender role attitudes on the number of children and child gender preference. Göbeklitepe Medical Science Journal, 6(13). https://doi.org/10.55433/gsbd.178
  20. Koruk, F., Eroğlu, K., Koruk, İ., Çelik, K., & Güner, P. (2022). Married men's perspectives and reproductive behaviors on fertility in the province with the highest fertility rate in Turkey: A mixed-method study. Nobel Medicus, 18 (2), 89–98. https://www.nobelmedicus.com/en/article/735/married-mens-perspectives-and-reproductive-behaviors-on-fertility-in-the-province-with-the-highest-fertility-rate-in-turkey-a-mix-method-study
  21. Koruk, İ., Duran, S., & Koruk, F. (2025). Doğurganlığın yüksek olduğu bir bölgede kadınların yüksek riskli doğurganlık davranışları ve ilişkili faktörler. Turkish Journal of Public Health, 23(1), 45–56. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/4775779
  22. Mutlu, S., & Yurtçu, E. (2020). The effects of the social environment and socio-economic conditions of pregnant relatives of pregnant women in karabük on the way of birth. Konuralp Medical Journal, 12(2), 296-300. https://doi.org/10.18521/ktd.597745
  23. Müslüman, M., & Apay, S. E. (2022). Determining the correlation between supportive care perceived in labor and traumatic childbirth perception: cross-sectional study. Turkiye Klinikleri Journal of Health Sciences, 7(2). https://doi.org/ 10.5336/healthsci.2021-83330.
  24. Özer, S., & Alpay, P. (2017). Women’s preferences for the mode of delivery in the urban and urban slum areas of manisa and effecting factors. Journal of Continuing Medical Education, 26(1), 9-19.
  25. Pomeranz, M., Arbib, N., Haddif, L., Reissner, H., Romem, Y., & Biron, T. (2018). In god we trust” and other factors ınfluencing trial of labor vs. Repeat cesarean section. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine, 31(13), 1777-1781. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/14767058.2017.1326906
  26. Preis, H., Benyamini, Y., Eberhard-Gran, M., & Garthus-Niegel, S. (2018). Childbirth preferences and related fears comparison between Norway and Israel. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 18(1), 362. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-018-1997-5.
  27. Republic of Turkey Ministry of Health (2018). Antenatal Care Management Guide (Publication No: 925). Ankara, Turkey: Ministry of Health. https://hsgm.saglik.gov.tr/depo/Yayinlarimiz/Rehberler/dogum_oncesi_bakim_08-01-2019_1.pdf
  28. Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Health. (2023). 2023 Health Statistics Yearbook, General Directorate of Health Information Systems. Ankara, Turkey. Accessed on 10 February 2025 from https://dosyasb.saglik.gov.tr/Eklenti/50208/0/siy2023ingilizce31012025pdf.pdf
  29. Sarıboğa, Y., Gürkan, Z., & Sarıkaya, R. (2025). Factors Associated With Low Childbirth Self-Efficacy for Vaginal Birth in High-Risk Pregnant Women. International Journal Of Nursing Practice, 31(1), e13323. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijn.13323
  30. Şanlıurfa Provincial Health Directorate. (2025). Şanlıurfa Training and Research Hospital 2024 birth statistics. https://sanliurfaeah.saglik.gov.tr/TR-1225901/2024-yili-dogum-istatistikleri.html
  31. Serçekuş, P. & Okumuş, H. (2009). Fears associated with childbirth among nulliparous women in Turkey. Midwifery, 25: 155-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2007.02.005
  32. Sönmez, C. İ., & Sivaslıoğlu, A. A. (2019). Gebe kadınların doğum şekli tercihi ve bunları etkileyen faktörler. Konuralp Medical Journal, 11(3), 369-376. https://doi.org/10.18521/ktd.629706
  33. Temizkan, E., & Mete, S. (2020). Determination of the factors affecting the birth style preferences of primiparas. Journal of Education and Research in Nursing, 17(2), 112–119. https://doi.org/10.5222/HEAD.2020.43179
  34. Topaktaş, G., & Beylik, U. (2024). Caesarean rate in Türkiye situation analysis and policy recommendations. The Jornal of Gynecology – Obstetrics and Neonatology, 21 (2), 102-113. https://doi.org/10.38136/jgon.1482889
  35. Turkish Statistical Institute. (2024). Birth Statistics, 2023. Accessed on 10 February 2025 from https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Dogum-Istatistikleri-2023-53708
  36. Uğuz, Y., & Karaçam, Z. (2022). the effects of birth preparation education on women's delivery type and views about birth. Journal of Adnan Menderes University Health Sciences Faculty, 6(3), 453-466. https://doi.org/10.46237/amusbfd.1061949.
  37. Vamos, C. A., Merrell, L., Detman, L., Louis, J., & Daley, E. (2019). Exploring women's experiences in accessing, understanding, appraising, and applying health ınformation during pregnancy. Journal of Midwifery & Women's Health, 13: 1-19. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/jmwh.12965
  38. Vatansever, Z., & Okumuş, H. (2013). G The study of decision making about the delivery type of pregnant women. Journal of Nursing Effect, 6(2), 81-87. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/deuhfed/issue/46814/587060#article_cite
  39. World Health Organizatiin (2015). Statement on Caesarean Section Rates. Accesed on 10 January 2025 from https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/161442/WHO_RHR_15.02_eng.pdf
  40. Yağmur, Y., & Çubuk, M. M. (2017). The effect of health education on women’s birth preferences. Annals of Health Sciences Research, 6(1), 7-11. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/annhealthscires/issue/65345/1006787
  41. Yalnız Dilcen, H. Canan, F., Ekti Genç, R., Kuloğlu, M. M., & Geçici, Ö. (2016). Development of a scale of traumatic childbirth perception. Turkish Medical Journal, 8(3), 115-122. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/tmj/issue/83999/1462575
  42. Yıldırım, G., & Bilgin, Z. (2021). Risk status and traumatic birth perception in pregnancy. Perspectives in Psychiatric Care, 57(4), 1897–1904. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppc.12764