“Us with them”: Co-designing a caesarean section consent and debriefing intervention in West Cameroon Co-design for better consent and debriefing for caesarean section
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
Background
Women-centred maternity care is a rights issue that determines the use of services. Such care ensures responsiveness to women’s needs which is enacted through shared decision-making, review and response. In the West Region of Cameroon, informed consent (IC) and Debriefing for caesarean section (c-section) have been shown to be suboptimal or absent. This paper describes the participatory design of a quality-improvement hospital-based intervention.
Methods
From February to May 2025, we conducted a co-design process with three groups of stakeholders: 59 post c-section women and community representatives, 78 frontline c-section providers, and 29 directors of public and private hospitals. We followed four phases: planning, conducting, evaluating, and reporting. The conduct phase comprised five all-day workshops with post c-section women and community representatives, followed by five all-day workshops with the c-section providers. Finally, we held an 11 th workshop with the hospital directors to scrutinize suggested interventions, evaluate their feasibility, and establish a consensus on their components. We described the intervention using the TIDieR (Template for Intervention Description and Replication) checklist. We documented the co-design process, using open-ended narratives to delineate interventions, and carried out real-time synthesis on visual aids (whiteboards and flipcharts). Intervention feasibility was quantified using a structured ad hoc matrix, while insights on facilitators and barriers were captured through qualitative free-text entries. We coupled data collection with constant comparison and triangulation through contemporaneous field notes, photographic documentation, and thematic mapping of stakeholders’ perceptions and interactive dynamics.
Results
Participants’ perspectives on the co-design were positive, and their motivation were very high although less than 50% reported previous involvement in co-design processes. More than 80% of participants found rated the co-design process as either good or very good. The final intervention comprised four components: (i) an in-service training; (ii) a standard operating procedure including a harmonised consent form and debriefing checklist; (ii) systematic supportive supervision, monitoring & evaluation; and (iv) a routine clinical audit. Each group of stakeholders upheld specific dimensions of the consent and debrief intervention. Post c-section women and community members emphasized emotional support, written discharge advice after debriefing, and zero tolerance of suboptimal consent and debriefing practices. Frontline c-section providers insisted on robust documentation for medico-legal protection. Hospitals Directors emphasized capacity-building and cultural friendliness. All the groups supported woman’s autonomous decision making. The intervention feasibility was rated high or very high by hospital directors except for the financial, infrastructural and technical domains.
Conclusion
This co-design process yielded a context-specific, multi-component intervention that was well accepted and deemed feasible across stakeholders. It provides a methodological approach to strengthening informed consent and debriefing as core elements of women-centred, accountable maternity care, and warrants implementation.
