Cited by 39Maternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsMaternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and PostpartumInfant Development and Preterm Care

Influence of elective and emergency cesarean delivery on mother emotions and bonding

Zanardo, Vincenzo, Soldera, Gino, Volpe, Francesca, Giliberti, Lara, Parotto, Matteo, Giustardi, Arturo, Straface, Gianluca·2016·Early Human Development

Abstract

Background Previous studies have indicated that mode of delivery could have a negative effect on bonding. Aims To assess feelings towards newborn infants in mothers who delivered by cesarean delivery, elective (ElCD) or emergency (EmCD). Study design This observational prospective study took place at the Division of Perinatal Medicine, Policlinico Abano Terme, Abano Terme, Italy, from September 2014 to April 2015. Subjects The sample included 573 puerperae divided into three groups: women undergone ElCD (n=73; 12.73%), women undergone EmCD (n=81; 14.13%) and women who underwent vaginal delivery (VD) (n=419; 73.12%). Outcome measures The instrument used was the Mother-to-Infant Bonding Scale (MIBS; Taylor et al., 2005), a self-report test to measure mother's feelings towards her baby. High scores indicate worse mother-to-infant bonding and a score≥2, established as cut-off, indicates an altered bonding. Results The mean MIBS global score was 0.50±1.05 in the VD mothers, 0.67 (±1.14) for ElCD mothers and 0.92 (±1.05) for EmCD mothers, resulting significantly higher in EmCD mothers (p<0.001). The percentage of altered bonding (Score≥2) in the three groups was of 11.21% (n=47) in VD, 17.80% (n=13) in ElCD and 23.45% (n=19) in EmCD, significantly higher in EmCD women (p<0.006). In addition, EmCD mothers scored significantly higher Joyful (0.074±0.26 vs 0.185±0.39; p<0.005) and Disappointed (0.063±0.25 vs 0.123±0.36; p<0.008) subscales. Conclusions It was found that EmCD negatively affects mother bonding and opening emotions, and originates in mother feelings like sadness and disappointment for the unplanned delivery evolution.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2016.05.006

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zanardo, V., Soldera, G., Volpe, F., Giliberti, L., Parotto, M., Giustardi, A., & Straface, G.
Affiliations
  • Policlinico Abano Terme (IT)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
Corresponding author
Zanardo, Vincenzo
Venue
Early Human Development
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-08
Volume
99
Pages
17-20
ISSN
0378-3782 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2465427524
Cited by
39
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1
FWCI
3.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Early Human Development (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Maternal Mental Health During Pregnancy and Postpartum
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Infant Development and Preterm Care
Keywords
elective cesarean section, emergency cesarean section, mother-infant bonding, maternal emotions, mode of delivery, vaginal delivery, puerperae, disappointment
MeSH terms
Adult, Cesarean Section, Emotions, Female, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Male, Mother-Child Relations, Mothers, Case-Control Studies

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