Exploring the skin-to-skin contact experience during cesarean section
Abstract
PURPOSE: To explore and describe the mother's experience of holding her neonate in skin-to-skin contact (SSC) immediately after cesarean delivery during surgical closure and recovery. DATA SOURCES: Eleven women between the ages of 23 and 38 years, who had achieved 39.1-40.2 weeks gestational age, participated in an ethnographic study using observations and interviews with the mothers conducted at 24-48 h postdelivery. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and content analysis of both observational notes and transcripts were used to analyze the data. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study describe the mother's experience of SSC during cesarean section. The primary theme that emerged was mutual caregiving: the mother-neonatal interaction and their shared and reciprocal relationship and benefits during SSC. Two contextual issues also were illuminated (a) the father's influence on the SSC experience and (b) the cesarean environment. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: With cesarean section the most common surgical procedure among American women, advanced practice nurses are in a unique position to encourage and educate women on the use of SSC for their benefit and that of their newborn. Advanced practice nurses are also empowered to influence institutional policy on SSC during cesarean deliveries at the local and national level.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The 4 predominant themes that emerged were consistent with those in previous studies exploring the role of skin-to-skin cesarean birth, which also showed positive outcomes.
“the 4 predominant themes that emerged were consistent with those in previous studies exploring the role of skin-to-skin cesarean birth, which also showed positive outcomes.8,46,47”
From Women’s experiences of skin-to-skin cesarean birth compared to standard cesarean birth: a qualitative study (2021) · cites this paper as [47]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Machold, C. A., O’Rinn, S. E., McKellin, W. H., Ballantyne, G., & Barrett, J. F. R. (2021) · CMAJ Open · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20200079 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
- Authors
- Frederick, A. C., Busen, N. H., Engebretson, J. C., Hurst, N. M., & Schneider, K. M.
- Affiliations
- The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (US)
- Baylor College of Medicine (US)
- Corresponding author
- Frederick, Anitra C.
- ORCID
- Engebretson, Joan C.
- Venue
- Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners
- Published
- 2016-01
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 31-38
- ISSN
- 2327-6886 (ISSN-L)
- 2327-6924
- OpenAlex
- W1599592555
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3
- FWCI
- 3.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Infant Development and Preterm Care
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Infant Health and Development
- Keywords
- skin-to-skin contact, cesarean section, maternal experience, paternal effects, advanced practice nurses, neonatal care, postpartum recovery
- MeSH terms
- Cesarean Section, Female, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Life Change Events, Mothers, Pregnancy, Touch
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review