...
首页> 外文期刊>BMJ: British medical journal >Could a randomised trial answer the controversy relating to elective caesarean section? National survey of consultant obstetricians and heads of midwifery
【24h】

Could a randomised trial answer the controversy relating to elective caesarean section? National survey of consultant obstetricians and heads of midwifery

机译:一个随机试验能回答的争议有关选择性剖腹产吗?的调查咨询产科医生和负责人助产术

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

International concerns about rising rates of caesarean section are counterbalanced by arguments that planned caesarean section without specific clinical indication (such as breech presentation or HIV infection) falls within legitimate maternal choice.1 Professional opinion is divided. To perform a caesarean section without clinical reason is seen as ethical, in response to maternal request, by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; is enshrined in law in Italy; but is viewed as unethical by the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence recommends that a second opinion should be offered.2 A well designed, randomised controlled trial of planned caesarean section compared with planned vaginal birth could provide important evidence.
机译:国际利率上升的担忧剖腹产是抵消了参数剖腹产没有计划特定的临床指标(如臀位演示或艾滋病毒感染)中合法的孕产妇choice.1是分裂的。没有临床理由被视为道德,应对孕产妇请求,由美国妇产科医生大学的校长;在意大利法律化;国际联合会的不道德妇产科。健康和临床建议第二个观点应该offered.2设计,计划的随机对照试验剖腹产阴道与计划生可以提供重要的证据。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号