Private Midwifery in Sydney Rotating Header Image

Obstetrics

New induction policy a threat to women, or a threat to doctors? You be the judge.

An article in The Newcastle Herald yesterday states that:

pushing a policy to reduce caesarean births are creating rules that are potentially dangerous for patients and threatening to doctors … red tape is threatening professional independence.

It also discouraged treatment tailored to individual patients.

… Compliance with directives telling obstetricians when and how to deliver babies was mandatory, under the threat of disciplinary action and loss of indemnity cover …

… a recent directive requiring a reduction in caesarean section rates to 20per cent by 2015 was an illusory and possibly dangerous target.

What is being referred to here is the NSW Health Policy Directive on induction of labour at or beyond term. It is a well-written and thorough document that can inform best practice for induction of labour. Rather than “telling obstetricians when and how to deliver babies”, it guides practice in a woman-centered manner:

Induction of labour carries inherent risk and must be exercised with caution. There needs to be clear benefits for the mother and/or the fetus.

At term, women must be offered information about the risks associated with prolonged pregnancies, and the options available to them.

Induced labour has an impact on the birth experience for women. Labour is often more painful than spontaneous labour, and epidural analgesia and assisted delivery are more likely to be required.
Treatment and care should take into account a woman’s individual needs and preferences. Women who are having, or being offered, induction of labour must have the opportunity to receive accurate information and make informed decisions about their care and treatment, in partnership with their health care professionals.

This doesn’t sound like an approach that is potentially dangerous for patients or an approach that discourages treatment that is tailored to individual patients.

The article goes on to assert that:

Also concerning was a departmental policy that elective or pre-labour caesarean section must not routinely be carried out before 39weeks gestation, due to risk of respiratory morbidity in babies.

And the problem is? All this is saying is that an elective or pre-labour caesarean should not routinely be carried out before 39 weeks. This is not the same as saying that caesarean can never be performed prior to 39 weeks, yet the contributors to the article go on to say that:

‘‘[The policy] effectively forbids doctors in NSW public hospitals to schedule routine elective caesarean section before 39weeks,’’ …‘‘Anyone doing so risks disciplinary action and may forfeit indemnity cover.’’

This is clearly nonsense!

The policy directive does state that:

Induction of labour must not routinely be offered on maternal request alone.

Health care professionals offering induction of labour must:
• provide the woman with adequate time to discuss the information with her partner/support person before coming to a decision;
• encourage the woman to access a variety of sources of information;
• invite the woman to ask questions, and encourage her to think about her options; and
• support the woman in whatever decision she makes.

Women should be offered support and analgesia as required, and staff should encourage women to use their own coping strategies for pain relief. This includes the opportunity to labour in water.

I fail to understand what is unreasonable about this policy which is evidence-based, woman-centered and flexible so as to meet the woman’s present health needs. Most health professionals practice within evidence-based guidelines, best practice guidelines and accepted standards of practice. These are developed in consultation with industry experts and after consultation of the relevant literature on the subject. I am curious that the obstetricians in this article are critical of a policy directive that is based on evidence and safe practice, citing that such a policy would threaten professional independence. RANZCOG has policies and guidelines, as does the UK Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. A mark of a professional body is that it possesses its own information that is unique to the profession. Why has this new policy directive caused such concern for doctors? It is merely suggesting that women should not be induced willy-nilly for no good reason and we have good evidence to justify this position.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Cascade of intervention

A study has found that first-time mothers who have their care within the general hospital system and have their labour induced, face a greater risk of having a caesarean section than those who wait for labour to start on its own.

In the study, 44 percent women had their labour induced, and 20% of those inductions failed (ie, labour did not start) and caesareans were performed in those cases.

By definition, induction is performed before a woman’s body is ready for labour, and this may point to the reason for such a high rate of failed inductions. In other cases, the reason for the induction is also the reason that the caesarean became necessary. For example, a labour may be induced because of concerns for the baby, and once in labour, the baby shows signs that it is not tolerating labour well and so a caesarean is performed.

The study does point to the issue that inductions should not be performed unless they are genuinely necessary. Up to 50% inductions may not be “indicated”, that is, performed for a medical reason. They might be performed more for convenience, for example. However, if we limit inductions to those which really need to be done, we would lower the caesarean rate.

There are some reasons when an induction might be a good idea, such as when the woman’s blood pressure is high, if the pregnancy goes beyond 42 weeks, if the waters have broken for many hours and labour has not started, if there are concerns for the baby and so on.

Before any induction is commenced, it’s important that women are fully informed by their care provider of the reasons for the induction, the alternatives, the process and procedure, what to expect and the likely outcome.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

The Unkindest Cut: Countdown to a C-Section

Link

… “Usually I start off by telling people my C-section started even before I got to the hospital …

… Sharp Mary Birch Hospital for Women and Newborns had the highest rate of cesarean section deliveries in San Diego County in 2009. The California average was 29.8 per 100 births; at Sharp Mary Birch, the rate was 37.7.

… At 40 weeks … Cooper-Schultz’s water broke, though she was not in labor. In a birthing class … they told her, we have to get the baby out within 24 hours. So she and her husband went to the hospital right away.

“They pretty much wanted to put me on Pitocin the minute I walked in the door because I wasn’t having regular contractions,” …

… women believe their C-section deliveries at Mary Birch were the result of convenience for the doctors, fear of litigation, and/or lack of staff training in nonmedicated childbirth options.

… It is common for hospitals to use Pitocin if a woman has not gone into active labor within 24 hours after her water has broken to avoid the risk of infection. But the staff at Mary Birch wanted to give Cooper-Schultz Pitocin within the first two hours.

Cooper-Schultz refused the Pitocin at first. She wanted to get things going naturally … At the 12-hour mark, her cervix had dilated to four centimeters. She says she now understands that this “is a good natural labor progression for a first-time mom.”

But it wasn’t fast enough for the staff at Mary Birch. Cooper-Schultz … allowed them to give her the Pitocin that she says they’d been pushing since she’d arrived.

… “They weren’t honest with me. They didn’t say, ‘If you get the Pitocin, you’re probably going to need an epidural.’”

… Cooper-Schultz withstood the pain of Pitocin contractions for eight hours before she finally gave in and got an epidural … The epidural worked on only her left half.

At one point, the doctor came in to check on her and alerted the nurses that she was going home to take her kids to school. Sometime later, she returned with wet hair, checked Cooper-Schultz, found her at nine centimeters, and told her to try pushing.

“I pushed, and [the baby’s] heart rate went down … she said she’s worried about it. She said, ‘He’s not in distress, but he’s a little bit stressed.’”

The doctor told Cooper-Schultz it would go one of three ways. In the first scenario, Cooper-Schultz would push for 20 or so minutes and the baby would come out. In the second, she could push for 20 or so minutes, the baby would not come out, and they’d have to do an emergency cesarean section. Or, the doctor said, they could do a cesarean section right now.

Cooper-Schultz chose the cesarean. …
∗ ∗ ∗

Helen … welcomes me into her North Park apartment shortly after the dinner hour on a Tuesday evening in mid-September. She tells me she’s an unlikely candidate for natural childbirth.

“I’m like Woody Allen,” she says. “I am a New Yorker who likes living in the city, who likes creature comforts. And for somebody like me to be embracing [natural childbirth] is humongous.”

… Dover’s story is similar to Cooper-Schultz’s in that it begins with a desire to give birth naturally … and ends in what she considers an unnecessary C-section. One difference is that when Dover started out, she did know she might have to fight for what she wanted … She stayed home and labored for 10 to 12 hours before she went to the hospital, avoiding “the clock” for as long as she could.

When she arrived, armed with her research and her hopes for a natural birth, she found that the environment at Mary Birch had a greater impact on her than she’d imagined it would.

… The progression she’d experienced at home, from two centimeters to four, slowed drastically when she arrived at the hospital. A doctor told her that it might help if he broke her water. So she allowed it. But nothing happened …

… Dover lists her regrets: Not waiting and laboring longer at home. Allowing the Pitocin at 12 hours. Giving in to the epidural after 8 more hours. But the regrets go as far back as her pregnancy, when she chose to stay with Sharp.

“I should’ve just switched … “In order for me to switch to Scripps and go to one of the birth rooms at Scripps, which has a much better record, would have meant changing everything: changing my primary care physician, changing my OBG. I would’ve had to totally change my insurance policy. And at the time, I already had a pediatrician picked out for her and everything. We’d interviewed, and just the idea of doing all of that was overwhelming. I thought I didn’t have the strength to do it.”

… “[The doctor] said, ‘You need a C-section,’” she says. “I said, ‘I don’t understand why I need a C-section. Everything seems to be fine. Her heart rate’s not dropping.’ And he said, ‘Well, she’s stuck.’”

“… I was totally against using the suction, but anything besides the total hands-off. He said, ‘I don’t want to hurt your baby, and you don’t want to hurt your baby.’ I started crying. And I just finally said, ‘Fine. Cut me open.’” …

∗ ∗ ∗

The obstetrician a woman chooses plays as large a role in her birth experience as the place she chooses to deliver her baby. Some doctors have a reputation for being more inclined to help with a natural birth, and others for being less inclined …

Thompson cites the “bait and switch,” where a doctor claims to support a woman’s birth choices up until the final weeks, when it’s too late to change doctors. Messer says she’s seen doctors who’ve initially said they’d support the hypnobirthing process but later changed their minds.

“All of a sudden it’s, ‘That’s not going to work. No, you can’t be on your hands and knees. That’s not safe, and this isn’t,’” Messer says. “And that’s at 40 weeks. So now, where can I switch?”

… Christine Stewart, a petite redhead and mother of twin girls born at Mary Birch in September 2009, says she experienced something similar with her doctor.

… “… we took a Bradley Method childbirth class,” Stewart says, “which is a 12-week class, pretty in-depth, and we decided we wanted to do natural, unmedicated labor.”

When she first mentioned this to her doctor, Stewart says the doctor told her to “keep an open mind” and not to “fixate on any particular way of labor and delivery.” At the time, Stewart thought the doctor didn’t want her to be disappointed if natural birth didn’t work out, but now she speculates that the doctor was always leaning toward a C-section.

At 36 weeks, the doctor suggested they induce her at 38 weeks. Stewart refused.

“From what I can tell,” she says, “it’s just common that it’s more manageable to have twins at 38 weeks because of size. Sometimes they’re concerned about size. But [my girls] were normal-sized.”

The doctor suggested 39 weeks, then 40. Finally, Stewart agreed to induce at 41 weeks if she hadn’t gone into labor by then. But it was unnecessary. At 40 weeks, three days short of her original due date, Stewart went into labor.

Stewart chose Mary Birch because it had everything she was looking for. Originally, she’d wanted to deliver at Best Start Birth Center in Hillcrest, but they don’t accept women who are pregnant with twins. Mary Birch, she says, seemed like the next best thing.

“It had the facilities, doctors on hand, and all these different classes — prenatal yoga — and since I was diagnosed high-risk because I had the twins and since I was over 35,” she says, “I just thought their whole entire focus is for women and newborns, so I’ll probably get the best care because they’ve got all the resources for that.”

Stewart had heard about other women going into the hospital prematurely and getting “strapped down” immediately. But in her natural childbirth class she’d learned that mobility helps with labor. So she and her husband didn’t go in right away.

Once they did arrive at the hospital, Stewart was four centimeters dilated. She gave the nursing staff her birth plan, which stated that she did not want any mention of pain medication.

“Thankfully, they did not offer medication. They were respectful of that … I was slowly dilating in a normal time frame. They were telling me that was normal …

… Christine Stewart believes that the main reason she ended up having a C-section was that her nurses had no training in natural childbirth.

“Ultimately, the outcome was because there was no one in the labor room who had the experience to help get the babies in position to be delivered,” she says.

By the time the doctor arrived, Stewart was fully dilated. She knew her babies were healthy, that they were both head down, in a good position, face forward. Her blood pressure was not elevated, she had no fever, and she’d been in labor for less than 24 hours. Everything was normal except that the babies were wedged in, each trying to get out first.

… At 2:00 a.m., the doctor came in and said, “It’s time to meet your girls.”

… I kind of resigned myself, like, ‘If this is what we have to do, this is what we have to do.’ I felt like crying because it just went against everything I had hoped for, everything I had planned and practiced for.”

“I think the hospital has some standard protocols, and I think that if you don’t follow their standard protocols, they just don’t know what to do with you,” she says. “And a C-section is manageable. They know exactly how to do it, and I think at 2:30 in the morning it’s, ‘We can manage this, and then we can all go home.’”

∗ ∗ ∗

Last March, when her first son was two and a half years old, Elizabeth Cooper-Schultz had her second child in the back bedroom of her UTC apartment, in the company of her husband, her midwife, two apprentice midwives, and a doula.

Today, Helen Dover is pregnant again. When I ask if she plans to give birth at Mary Birch, she and Henry simultaneously answer, “No.”

“What I’ve learned is that at Mary Birch, everybody’s going to try to get you to do the birth that they want you to do,” Dover explains.

For their next baby, the Dovers will stay with Sharp in order to take advantage of the tests, which would cost them thousands of dollars out-of-pocket. They will also register at Mary Birch so that they are prepared in the event of an emergency. But they have hired a midwife to help them birth at home.

“We’re going just to get what doctors are good for,” Henry says, “and then to use the midwives for what they’re good for.”….

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Satisfaction and support in birth

A recent study from QLD has surveyed 20,371 women who recently gave birth. Experiences of pregnancy, labour, birth and after birth care were assessed for the most recent birth, retrospectively four to five months after birth. The findings were very interesting! The only issues with the data and study is that mothers self-reported their answers and there was no verification of the information, or cross-checking with the midwives and obstetricians who provided the care. In other words, it was based on women’s subjective experiences rather than what might perhaps be factual or accurate. That being said, I wanted to draw a few points out of the study and elaborate more on them. The other aspect to raise is that I am making an inference when I write about this study: the study compared women who were cared for in public facilities (public hospital delivery suites and birth centres: women who for the most part would have had public care providers) with women who gave birth in private facilities. Those women would, for the most part, have booked with a private obstetrician and given birth under their care. So from this, I am inferring that public care = care from public hospital staff where the woman does not choose her care provider; and private facility care = private obstetric care.

Being cared for well during pregnancy

The study found that women who birthed in private facilities were significantly more likely to say they were cared for very well during pregnancy than women who birthed in public facilities.

This is not surprising as women birthing in private facilities would be cared for in pregnancy by one obstetrician who was chosen by them.

Women who birthed in private facilities were also significantly more likely to report being treated with respect, treated with kindness and understanding, and treated as an individual by their pregnancy care providers.

This too is not surprising as their care provider was chosen by them.

Women who birthed in private facilities were also significantly more likely to say their pregnancy care providers were open and honest, respected their privacy, respected their decisions, and genuinely cared about their well-being.

This is all good news for continuity of carer models in pregnancy. Continuity of carer is very different to continuity of care. Continuity of care means continuous care from a small group of people – or even a large organisation – who shares a similar philosophy. It is interesting to see how far (and wide) this definition is stretched. Some would have us believe that we can give birth at the largest and busiest tertiary hospital as a public patient and receive continuity of care even though we had 30 care providers and never saw the same person twice. This definition – continuity of care – would still hold even in the above situation because all of the hospital staff would be working to the same philosophy and policies. Hence, continuity.

Continuity of carer, on the other hand, means that care is provided by one person for the most part. This is what we generally see with private obstetric care and private midwifery care.

Women who birthed in private facilities were more likely to say they were cared for very well in labour and birth than women who birthed in public facilities. However, the study found marked variations between public birth facilities with birth centres and midwifery-led units having the highest proportion of women saying they were cared for very well during their labour and birth.

This is good news for all those women who book with a private midwife or a public hospital-based caseload model.

Women who birthed in a private facility were generally more satisfied with the support they received after the birth, although only about 50% women were satisfied. The public hospital care rated even more poorly than that! This is evidence that the delivery of postnatal care needs to shift to meet the needs of women and babies.

Generally, women are discharged home early after the birth of their baby, with lengths of stay generally being around 24 – 48 hours in a public hospital. Women are then visited by a midwife once or twice following discharge; some hospitals provide more visits than this. Women who book with a private midwife generally enjoy more postnatal visits: 7 to 14 on average, with each visit lasting about an hour. A s well as this, women are generally prepared thoroughly in pregnancy for breastfeeding and baby care so that it is not so scary when the baby arrives.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Labour induction methods compare favourably

Link

… a method of inducing labour that dates back to the 1930s “has been found to work as well as modern treatments but with fewer side effects”.

The news is based on a large Dutch trial that examined inducing labour using of a simple mechanical device, called a Foley catheter. Researchers tested the device against the use of hormone gels designed to trigger contractions. The study … found that both techniques led to similar rates of spontaneous vaginal deliveries, instrumental deliveries … and women requiring a caesarean section.

The Foley catheter also seemed to lead to fewer side effects in the women and their babies, although using the method of induction … led to longer labours …

Current guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) recommend the use of hormone gels for induction of labour, but not the routine use of mechanical devices for induction … This new, relatively large trial has shown no important differences between the two methods used in these women. It is possible that the mechanical technique might find a place for women where there may be risks from using hormone gel …

… a high proportion of induced labours are performed because a woman’s cervix is not ready for the birth and does not open appropriately.

This randomised controlled trial compared two methods for inducing birth in women who had single babies and a reason to be induced. The women were either induced using mechanical means (a Foley catheter) or with application of a hormone gel into the vagina. A Foley catheter is a mechanical device that helps open the cervix. A fluid-filled balloon is inflated in the cervix, which stretches it until it is at an appropriate size to allow birth. The prostaglandin hormone gel mimics the natural mechanism by which a woman’s hormones cause the cervix to open.

The researchers say that hormonal induction has become the method of choice in several countries, but that use of the Foley catheter may result in similar numbers of successful inductions without the need for a caesarean section. They also say that the Foley catheter induction may have several advantages over hormone methods, such as not causing “over-stimulation” of the birthing processes …

… the caesarean section rates were much the same between the two groups: 23% of women who had been induced using a Foley catheter required a caesarean section compared to 20% of the women induced using the hormone gel … Likewise, a similar number of women in each group needed extra mechanical help with the birth, such as the use of forceps (11% in the Foley catheter group and 13% in the hormone gel group).

A greater number of women induced with the Foley catheter required a caesarean because they failed to progress in the first stage of birth (12%) than the hormone gel group (8%) … Similar proportions of each group had a caesarean section because their baby was becoming distressed (7% in the Foley catheter group compared to 9% in the hormone gel group).

… Fewer women in the prostaglandin hormone group (59%) needed an additional hormone called oxytocin to stimulate uterus contractions than in the Foley catheter group (86%). The time from the start of induction to birth was on average 29 hours (range 15-35 hours) in the Foley catheter group and 18 hours (range 12-33 hours) in the hormone gel group.

The groups did not differ in terms of painkillers taken, haemorrhage, overstimulation or health status of the baby. Fewer babies delivered with the Foley catheter (12%) needed to be admitted to the general ward (not an intensive care ward) than those induced using hormones (20%). More women treated with the hormone gel (3%) had suspected infections during birth compared to those induced with Foley catheter (1%) …

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Choosing the best care provider for your needs

Choosing the best practitioner for your needs is a very important and personal decision. Ultimately, there is no right or wrong choice: some women will choose a private obstetrician, others will choose a private midwife and others will choose public hospital care. Some women will make an initial choice of care provider and decide to change care providers during the pregnancy. Other women will make one choice in their first pregnancy and then a different choice in a subsequent pregnancy. What’s important is to have an accurate understanding all the options available so that you can feel confident to choose the best option for your needs. The best people to talk to are the people who actually provide the service, rather than a GP who is removed from the actual services of an obstetrician / midwife / public hospital. Get referred to a private obstetrician or two; interview them; reflect on how you feel after meeting them. Go and visit your local public hospital. Have a tour and speak with the midwives there. And interview a couple of eligible midwives. You do not need a GP referral to see an eligible midwife and you can claim their services through medicare. An eligible midwife is a private midwife who has met an additional registration standard that enables them to have a Medicare provider number.

When you are considering a care provider, it’s also necessary to consider where you would like to give birth and to ensure that your care provider can attend you in your chosen setting. You might choose to birth your baby in a public hospital as a public or private patient, in a private hospital as a private patient, in a birth centre or at home. It can be helpful when trying to make a decision to write down a list of questions you may have and also consider what is important to you as you make your choices. For example:

What do I want from my care?
What type of practitioner would I feel most comfortable with?
What do I need from my practitioner to feel comfortable and safe?
Do I want public or private care?
Is continuity of care important to me?

These are questions only you can answer. Other questions are for your care providers to answer with you, and it’s a good idea to interview a few care providers – midwives and obstetricians – before making a choice. Midwives and obstetricians will charge a fee for interviews and you are able to claim this through Medicare (your midwife will need to be eligible in order for you to claim a Medicare benefit). It is important during the interview that you ask all the questions that are on your mind, and to be aware of how you feel throughout the interview. Your care provider should inspire you with confidence, help you to feel at ease and comfortable, and the appointment should feel unhurried.

Likewise, your care provider may like to “interview” you, and this is so that your care provider can be sure that s/he can meet your needs. Maternity care is provided in a partnership and so it’s important that both parties feel really comfortable with the other.

There are many questions you might wish to ask your care provider; the best suggestion is to consider what is important to you and write a list of questions.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

I’m pregnant and I have private health insurance. What are my options?

Great question! There are a few options available to you as a private patient, as well as all of the options that are available to public patients. The private options are either a private midwife, or a private obstetrician.

Private midwife
To receive care from a private midwife and obtain Medicare benefits, your midwife will need to be an “eligible midwife” (meet an additional registration standard) and work with an obstetrician or a doctor who provides obstetric services. Some private midwives are able to provide labour and birth care in hospital settings, while others are only able to provide labour and birth care at home. All private midwives can provide pregnancy and postnatal care. Hospital options may include private or public hospitals; it’s best to ask your midwife which hospitals she attends births at. Eligible midwives provide complete continuity of care: the midwife you book with will be the same midwife who provides all of your pregnancy, birth and postnatal care.

Private obstetrician
Private obstetricians provide pregnancy, birth and postnatal care, although birth care would also be provided by hospital midwives who may be unknown to you until birth. Private obstetricians deliver babies at public and private hospitals. Continuity is provided during the pregnancy, but birth care is mostly provided by hospital midwives. Postnatal care is almost always provided by hospital midwives, with your obstetrician visiting you each day in hospital and at 6 weeks.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

First-time mums learn the hard way: informed mums choose private midwives

A recent article has suggested that first-time mums have overly unrealistic ideas about their birth – that it will be a natural, uncomplicated birth, when in reality it is not, for the majority. We know that women choosing care through the general hospital system will experience high rates of interventions, leading ultimately to a caesarean. But few women know that if they engage a private midwife for a hospital or homebirth, they will experience much lower rates of intervention, but with the same level of safety. Care with an eligible private midwife will attract medicare benefits, and obstetric care is readily available if it is needed. The article below described one woman’s experience of general hospital care. I can only assume that this reporter has written the article in response to the outcry about the original research.

HERVEY Bay first-time mum Jasmine Adame has experienced first-hand just how difficult childbirth can be.

And she agrees with new research … that suggests that many first-time mums are unprepared for the realities of a complicated labour.

Jasmine delivered her little girl … at Hervey Bay Hospital after spending a day and a half in labour.

In the end, she was told her labour had stalled and she had to have an emergency caesarean.

We are not told how long labour stalled for, whether she had her own midwife with her throughout her labour (unlikely since this is not available to most women through the general hospital system) and we are also not told how far through her labour she was. It is true that some caesareans are performed for “failure to progress” when the woman’s cervix is less than 3 centimeters dilated, indicating that she is not yet in established labour.

Jasmine had attended antenatal classes prior to having her first child and said it was the midwives who held these classes who gave her the best idea of what labour was actually going to be like.

Hospital classes are great at telling women about hospital policies, but independent childbirth education will inspire women with confidence about what their bodies are capable of, with the right support.

“I knew it wasn’t going to be fun.

“But I didn’t expect it to be as horrid as it was,” she said.

It sounds like she didn’t have the care of a midwife who was known and trusted. Most women I work with will experience their labour extremely positively, as if it was the best (hardest and most challenging, but oh so rewarding) experience of their life.

… The chances of having a medically uncomplicated birth were actually 21%.

This applies to women birthing in the general hospital system, where they will not be cared for by one midwife who is known to them, chosen by them and trusted by them. The chance of a medically uncomplicated birth when a woman chooses private midwifery care is around 70% – 80%. This is a huge difference.

Because she had been focused on a natural delivery, the decision to deliver the baby by caesarean took Jasmine by surprise – and the time between the decision and the birth was very swift, allowing her little time to adjust …

This is addressed during care with a private midwife, where there is ample time to explore all options and possibilities, so that there are few surprises on the day (or night!). Hour-long appointments allow plenty of time for questions and education. The possibility of a first-time mum “needing” a caesarean in the general hospital system is 25%, or one in four. Given this large minority, we would think that all women going through the hospital system would be thoroughly appraised of this possibility. In my private practice, a mere 3% first-time mums need a caesarean. This is not because we push the boundaries of safety: it is because women who are well supported, well-informed, relaxed and confident about their birth will generally start labour on their own at term, labour normally and birth their babies unassisted by any instruments or operations.

Hopefully Jasmine will choose private midwifery care with her next pregnancy (private midwifery care is available for a planned hospital birth), where she can expect an 80% – 90% chance of a vaginal birth following her caesarean in her first pregnancy. Or will she choose to go back to the general hospital system, where she has a mere 15% chance of a vaginal birth?

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Balancing The Womb

Link

New research hopes to explain premature births and failed inductions of labour. The study by academics at the University of Bristol suggests a new mechanism by which the level of myosin phosphorylation is regulated in the pregnant uterus.

… phosphorylation of uterus proteins at specific amino acids have a key role in the regulation of uterine activity in labour.

A remarkable feature of the uterus … is that it remains relatively relaxed for the nine months of pregnancy … and then, during labour, it contracts forcibly and the baby is born. A special type of smooth muscle that grows and stretches during pregnancy to accommodate the fetus and the placenta forms the uterus.

Hormones such as oxytocin or prostaglandins promote labour, but the biochemical changes that allow the switch from relaxation to contractions to happen are not fully understood. This makes it difficult to predict when a woman is going to deliver. In eight to ten per cent of women delivery occurs too early … On the other hand when labour has to be induced for medical reasons, it is impossible to know whether the induction will be successful or whether it will require an emergency caesarean section …

… small biopsies of uterine tissue from women who delivered … demonstrated that contractions require both a calcium dependent pathway driven by myosin kinase and a calcium independent pathway that regulates the activity of myosin phosphatase …

… “This study has increased our understanding of the biochemical changes underlying uterine activity and may help in the design of better drugs to prevent preterm labour or to induce labour successfully at term, benefiting many thousands of women and their babies.” …

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Inducing labor doesn’t raise risk of uterine rupture in VBAC

Link

Inducing labor doesn’t increase the risk of uterine rupture, once length of labor is taken into account, in women attempting vaginal delivery after a cesarean delivery …

… After accounting for length of labor using a time-to-event analysis, researchers found that the risk of uterine rupture with induced labor was similar to that of spontaneous labor … Women with an initial unfavorable cervical exam (<4 cm dilation) had a higher risk of uterine rupture with induced labor than spontaneous labor ... and those with cervical dilation <2 cm and 2 cm-3.9 cm on the initial exam were at greatest risk.

Women who undergo induced labor may spend more time in active labor than those with spontaneous labor ...

Interesting research, as common understanding has it that induction is never a wise choice in a VBAC, and many women who need an induction who have previously had a caesarean are advised to undergo a repeat caesarean. If induction can be safely carried out, this would help to reduce our high caesarean rates.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Treatment Halves Preterm Birth Rate

Link

The risk of preterm birth and neonatal mortality and morbidity declined significantly in asymptomatic women with a … short cervix treated with vaginal progesterone …

The treatment was associated with a 40% to 50% reduction in the risk of preterm birth, a 43% reduction in total neonatal morbidity and mortality, and a 45% reduction in the frequency of low birth weight.

… “Our analysis provides compelling evidence that vaginal progesterone prevents preterm birth and reduces neonatal morbidity and mortality in women with a short cervix,” …

“Importantly, progesterone reduced early preterm birth. These immature babies are at the greatest risk for complications, death, and long-term disability. Progesterone also decreased a fraction of late preterm births, which are the most common preterm deliveries.”

… Progesterone has a key role in maintenance of pregnancy …

“Vaginal progesterone was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of preterm birth <33 weeks of gestation in both women with a single gestation and no previous preterm birth, as well as in women with a single gestation and at least one previous spontaneous preterm birth before 37 weeks of gestation," ...

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Abruption Among Most Likely Causes of Stillbirth

Link

The most common causes of stillbirth were obstetric conditions such as abruption and complications of multiple gestation and by placental abnormalities …

Almost 30% of stillbirths in a large cohort study were due to obstetric conditions, while placental abnormalities accounted for nearly a quarter …

… having had a previous stillbirth was the strongest risk factor for another one …

… Both studies were part of the Stillbirth Collaborative Research Network Writing Group, which was convened to assess risk factors for, and causes of, stillbirth in the U.S. Stillbirth was defined as fetal death at 20 weeks’ gestation or later.

Thus far, there’s been a dearth of information on the condition, which makes it challenging to design prevention strategies …

… About a third of stillbirths occurred between 20 and 24 weeks’ gestation, and half occurred before 28 weeks …

The most common cause (29.3%) was an obstetric condition, such as abruption and complications of multiple gestation, or related to the constellation of preterm labor, preterm premature rupture of membranes, and cervical insufficiency.

Placental abnormalities was the second most common cause (23.6%), followed by fetal genetic structural abnormalities (13.7%), infection (12.9%), umbilical cord abnormalities (10.4%), hypertensive disorders (9.2%), and other maternal medical conditions (7.8%).

… More intrapartum stillbirths had infectious causes … while antepartum stillbirths had a higher proportion of placental causes … and fetal genetic structural abnormalities …

… pregnancy history, specifically, having a previous stillbirth, was the strongest risk factor for the condition …

Other risk factors associated with stillbirth included … Diabetes … Maternal age 40 years or older … Maternal AB blood type … History of drug addiction … Smoking during the three months before pregnancy … Obesity/overweight …

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Forceps delivery tied to lower brain injury risk

Link

When babies need help coming into the world, forceps may carry less risk of newborn seizures compared with vacuum deliveries or Cesarean section …

In recent years, forceps have fallen out of favor when it comes to aiding a difficult childbirth. Vacuum devices are more often used, while C-section rates have surged.

… that’s all despite a lack of evidence that vacuum or C-section deliveries are actually safer for newborns compared with forceps …

… newborns delivered by forceps were 45 percent less likely to suffer a seizure than those born via vacuum pump or C-section.

On the other hand, babies delivered by C-section were less likely to have one type of bleeding around the brain — known as subdural hemorrhage.

The risks of any of those complications were low, whatever the type of delivery …

Forceps have often been labelled riskier for mothers and babies than a vacuum extraction delivery, however this study questions that belief. My experience has been that a forceps delivery, in the hands of a skilled obstetrician, is perfectly safe for the mother and baby. I have found that forceps are more likely than a vacuum to result in a vaginal birth, while more attempted vacuum deliveries “fail” and end up going to caesarean section. Fewer forceps deliveries “fail”. With a vacuum extraction, the baby is essentially pulled out by its scalp, whereas with forceps, the baby is pulled out by the body parts of its face and skull. I think this method is kinder to the baby. The best approach though is to promote unassisted vaginal birth, where the woman pushes her baby out (or breathes her baby out) without any instruments. This is most likely if the woman has had no pain relief in labour, is assisted to birth in an upright position and is supported by a known and supportive midwife.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Decision-making: Heart and Head

Through my practice, I have a lot of women coming to me who are experiencing conflict with regards to the choices they have made for their pregnancy and birth. Typically, they find (sometimes quite late in their pregnancy) that perhaps the choice they made right back at the start of their pregnancy, no longer works for the, or the choice that they made was perhaps not as well informed as they thought it was. Some women find it hard to take the attitude of interviewing potential care providers before pregnancy (or very early in pregnancy) and then choosing the midwife or obstetrician who is best able to meet their needs. The end result can often be a woman who chooses an obstetrician with the goal of a natural birth, only to discover that their doctor will only “deliver” their baby if they’re on their back in bed with an epidural in place. Or that induction is performed by 40 weeks, or that all women have their waters broken and all first time Mums have an episiotomy or so on. And sometimes, the more reading a woman does, the more she realises that this is not what she wants.

I often ask the question, “What was it that made you decide on this particular care provider?”

And the responses are generally very interesting.

• My GP referred me
• My mother / sister / friend / neighbour used this midwife and she said she’s wonderful
• Well, when I got pregnant I went to my GP. She asked me if I have private health insurance and I said yes, so she wrote a referral to Dr XX.

I ask these women if they considered any other options. “What options?” comes the response.

I’m amazed that with the marvels of modern technology, internet etc, women don’t know they have other options. We have options with all sorts of things in life, and we don’t shy away from discovering them either! It seems to be to be an interesting handing-over of responsibility when it comes to pregnancy and birth, and I’m curious why it happens with pregnancy and birth, but not in other aspects of life. Do we buy a particular computer – that can’t meet our needs – because it was recommended and we didn’t know there were other computers on the market? Do we buy a large house when we need a small house because it was recommended by the real estate agent?

In most other situations where choices are involved, people will engage in a process of assessing options.

We might list all the possible options and then assess each option across a range of qualities.

We ask questions.

We consider what it is that we really want, and then match it to what’s available, seeking the most compatible choice.

But sadly, this does not happen with pregnancy and birth. Perhaps it should?

Visit my website to explore birthing services.

Charging women for non-medical caesareans?

Link

The health minister has said that women in Northern Ireland who choose to have a Caesarean for non-medical reasons may have to pay for the operation.

Edwin Poots is launching a consultation on a review of maternity services.

Women at low risk will be encouraged to consider having their baby in a midwife-led unit or at home, if appropriate.

Around 30% of deliveries are by Caesarean section – the highest level in the UK and Ireland.

… giving birth was a natural process and superb assistance was available to help women through the delivery.

“It costs several thousand pounds more for a Caesarean section so there are savings to be made,” …

“… what we want to encourage, is more people to give birth naturally because it has better outcomes for the mother and the baby.

… “We want to ensure that people take the natural choice where they can and to have that back up where they need Caesarean section to take place.”

… At present, women who elect to go private to have a Caesarean on non-medical grounds pay for their pre and post-natal care.

But the cost of the delivery is met by the health service.

… women will be encouraged to have their baby in a midwife led unit

“If you want to go down that route, if you want to pay for it, it is totally up to yourself, but I don’t feel that we the public in Northern Ireland should be paying additional money for people to have the choice.”

The minister said he expected to see a “considerable” number of midwifery units being established.

“A lot of them would be set up in association with the main maternity unit, so they would be on the same site as existing hospitals,” …

“Women would be giving birth totally with the midwives but there would be a fallback position of having an obstetrician nearby if things do not work out.”

Breedagh Hughes from the Royal College of Midwives said the focus was on trying to “normalise” child birth.

… “One of the things we hope will come out in the review will be asking trusts to look at … the reasons for the Caesarean sections and to focus on trying to prevent women from having that first Caesarean section, which very often leads to the old adage – ‘once a section always a section’.”

She said a “fear” of child birth stopped many women from choosing a natural birth.

“When one in every three women gives birth by Caesarean section, you lose that critical mass of people who know what it is like to give birth normally, and women are losing confidence in their own body’s ability to give birth,” she said.

Ms Hughes also welcomed proposals to shift the focus to midwife led care.

“I think if women are given the opportunity to get to know and trust their midwife and to trust their own bodies, we’re more likely to see women saying, ‘OK, this is what nature intended me for and this is what I’m going to do’,” …

Visit my website to explore birthing services

Ob-gyn guidelines often based on opinion, weak data

I am not sure of the intent of the article below as although guidelines may not be based on good, solid evidence (which is often in scarce supply), that is no reason for experts not to work together to create guidelines that are based on the best available evidence and experience. If we did not have guidelines for clinical practice, we would not have a standard to inform best clinical care. The guidelines that are created may well turn out to be ineffective, inappropriate or otherwise unworkable, and on that basis they would be reviewed and changed if necessary.

Link

Solid evidence is often missing from the practice guidelines used by obstetrician-gynecologists …

Less than a third of the recommendations from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) are based on gold-standard scientific experiments …

The rest are based on … expert opinion, which is subject to personal biases …

“That is often the fall-back when there is no data,” … expert opinion is helpful in pointing out what we don’t know, but might not always translate into what’s best for patients.

… Guidelines help doctors keep up with the latest developments in their fields and are widely perceived as a recipe for good patient care.

But there is often surprisingly little hard data behind them …

… guidelines panels conduct extensive reviews of the medical literature to find all relevant evidence and also take care to exclude experts with financial conflicts of interest.

… those are two key elements in creating good guidelines.

… “For many of the recommendations there simply is not enough data, or it is disputed,” … “So there has to be a role for expert opinion.”

Visit my website to explore birthing services.

I’m pregnant. Who should I go to for care? A Midwife or an Obstetrician?

Private Midwife:

  • Provides autonomous pregnancy, birth and postnatal care for women who are experiencing normal, healthy pregnancies
  • Provides care in consultation with an obstetrician when a woman’s pregnancy has risk factors (eg high blood pressure, prem labour, concern for baby’s growth, gestational diabetes etc)
  • Transfers responsibility for care to an obstetrician if complications emerge and continues to provide care within the midwifery scope of practice
  • Supports women to birth normally with a high rate of natural birth
  • Supports women to breastfeed
  • Provides pregnancy, birth and postnatal care
  • Pregnancy appointments allow time for questions, education and discussion with appointments typically 45-60 minutes in duration
  • Women are highly likely to report satisfaction with their care and experience
  • Private Obstetrician:

  • Provides autonomous care for women regardless of risk factors
  • Receives referrals from midwives for women with risk-associated pregnancies or births
  • Always provides labour and birth care (including caesarean) in collaboration with a midwife
  • Obstetric care on average results in a high degree of intervention such as induction, epidural, caesarean and episiotomy
  • Provides brief in-hospital consultations after the baby is born, followed by a 6-week check
  • Pregnancy appointments are generally no more than 15 minutes in duration
  • Collaborative care: private midwife and private obstetrician

  • Receive autonomous pregnancy, birth and postnatal care from one midwife and one obstetrician regardless of risk factors
  • No transfer of care if risk factors emerge
  • Supports women to birth normally with a high rate of natural birth
  • Supports women to breastfeed
  • Provides pregnancy, birth and postnatal care
  • Pregnancy appointments allow time for questions, education and discussion with appointments typically 45-60 minutes in duration
  • Women are highly likely to report satisfaction with their care and experience
  • Provides autonomous care for women regardless of risk factors
  • Supports women to birth naturally, including with twins, a breech baby or a VBAC
  • Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Choosing the right care provider

    Choosing the right practitioner is a very personal decision and there is no right or wrong choice. Some women will make an initial choice of care provider and decide to change care providers during the pregnancy other women will make one choice in their first pregnancy and then a different choice in a subsequent pregnancy. What’s important is understanding all the options available so that you can feel confident to choose the best option for your needs.

    When you are considering a care provider, it’s also necessary to consider where you would like to give birth and to ensure that your care provider can attend you in your chosen setting. You might choose to birth your baby in a public hospital as a public or private patient, in a private hospital as a private patient, in a birth centre or at home. It can be helpful when trying to make a decision to write down a list of questions you may have and also consider what is important to you as you make your choices. For example:

    What do I want from my care?
    What type of practitioner would I feel most comfortable with?
    Do I want public or private care?

    These are questions only you can answer. Other questions are for your care providers, and it’s a good idea to interview a few care providers – midwives and obstetricians – before making a choice. Midwives and obstetricians will charge a fee for interviews and you are able to claim this through Medicare (your midwife will need to be eligible in order for you to claim a Medicare benefit). It is important during the interview that you ask all the questions that are on your mind, and to be aware of how you feel throughout the interview. Your care provider should inspire you with confidence, help you to feel at ease and comfortable, and the appointment should feel unhurried.

    Likewise, your care provider may like to “interview” you, and this is so that your care provider can be sure that s/he can meet your needs. Maternity care is provided in a partnership and so it’s important that both parties feel really comfortable with the other.

    There are many questions you might wish to ask your care provider; the best suggestion is to consider what is important to you and write a list of questions.

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    I’m pregnant and I have private health insurance. What are my options?

    Great question! There are a few options available to you as a private patient, as well as all of the options that are available to public patients. Specifically, the private options are either a private midwife, or a private obstetrician.

    Private midwife
    To receive care from a private midwife and obtain Medicare benefits, your midwife will need to work with an obstetrician or a doctor who provides obstetric services. Some private midwives are able to provide labour and birth care in hospital settings, while others are only able to provide labour and birth care at home. All private midwives can provide pregnancy and postnatal care. Hospital options may include private or public hospitals; it’s best to ask your midwife which hospitals she attends births at.

    Private obstetrician
    Private obstetricians can provide pregnancy, birth and postnatal care, although birth care would also be provided by hospital midwives who may be unknown to you until birth. Private obstetricians deliver babies at public and private hospitals.

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Cascade of intervention

    A study has found that first-time mothers who have their care within the general hospital system and have their labour induced, face a greater risk of having a caesarean section than those who wait for labour to start on its own.

    In the study, 44 percent women had their labour induced, and 20% of those inductions failed (ie, labour did not start) and caesareans were performed in those cases.

    By definition, induction is performed before a woman’s body is ready for labour, and this may point to the reason for such a high rate of failed inductions. In other cases, the reason for the induction is also the reason that the caesarean became necessary. For example, a labour may be induced because of concerns for the baby, and once in labour, the baby shows signs that it is not tolerating labour well and so a caesarean is performed.

    he study does point to the issue that inductions should not be performed unless they are genuinely necessary. Up to 50% inductions may not be “indicated”, that is, performed for a medical reason. They might be performed more for convenience, for example. However, if we limit inductions to those which really need to be done, we would lower the caesarean rate.

    There are some reasons when an induction might be a good idea, such as when the woman’s blood pressure is high, if the pregnancy goes to 42 weeks, if the waters have broken for many hours and labour has not started, if there are concerns for the baby and so on.

    Before any induction is commenced, it’s important that women are fully informed by their care provider of the reasons for the induction, the alternatives, the process and procedure, what to expect and the likely outcome.

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    Caesarean section? Vaginal birth? Your choice!

    Visit my website to explore homebirth and hospital birth.

    Much has been said and written about an article in The Age this weekend. The article is about a randomised study that will compare the outcomes of 500 women who choose a caesarean and 500 women who choose a vaginal birth. The study will explore psychological and physical outcomes for the women and their babies, including depression and breastfeeding rates. It will only compare vaginal births with caesareans for healthy women with uncomplicated pregnancies.

    The study has created much debate, including issues of ethics (beneficence, autonomy, non-maleficence) and professional duty of care. I wonder if part of the “answer” will not be answered by this study, since the study only addresses outcomes from the first pregnancy, but most women do not have one child, they have two, on average. It’s reasonable to assume that a woman who has an elective caesarean for her first baby, will go onto have an elective caesarean for her second baby.

    In the current maternity system in NSW, a woman who chooses a vaginal birth for her first baby has the following outcomes:

  • only 52% women having their first baby will have a normal birth
  • 33% will be induced
  • 23% will have forceps or vacuum
  • 25% will have a caesarean – and of these women, only 12% will have a vaginal birth in their subsequent pregnancy.
  • In other words, only 75% of first time mums who elect to have a vaginal birth will actually have one.

    In contrast, a first time Mum who chooses a vaginal birth with a private midwife has about a 95% chance of having a vaginal birth.

    The real question isn’t the outcomes of a first-time Mum’s pregnancy when she chooses a vaginal birth or a caesarean, but rather, what happens for the average woman who has two children, who has elected a caesarean with her first versus a vaginal birth with her first baby. In other words, how about we compare the outcomes of women who have two caesareans, with women who elect to have a vaginal birth the first time around, 75% of whom will birth vaginally, and 25% of whom will have a caesarean.

    Such a study would address the issue of second caesarean risks. Serious maternal morbidity (eg placenta praevia, placenta accreta, uterine rupture, need for hysterectomy and blood transfusion) increases progressively with increasing number of cesarean sections a woman has. The first caesarean is generally very safe but increasing numbers of caesareans are perhaps not so safe.

    A further issue with the study is that it does not suggest any method or support for the women who elect to birth vaginally. Will they be supported with one-to-one midwifery care, as this is known to increase vaginal birth rates? Will they include homebirthing women who are highly motivated to birth normally and without interventions? Or will it be standard obstetric / hospital-based births with high rates of intervention that are already known to result in reduced breastfeeding rates and a dissatisfaction with the birthing experience? I will wait to read the results.

    “I’ve been told my baby is big”

    and my care provider wants to induce me / schedule a caesarean.

    An interesting dilemma. What to do? A recent article has found that ultrasound diagnosis of fetal macrosomia (a big baby) at term is inaccurate in the majority of cases, and this inaccuracy may be contributing to unnecessary caesarean sections.

    In an observational cohort study of 235 pregnancies at term in which ultrasound measurements led to a diagnosis of fetal macrosomia, only about a third of the infants were actually macrosomic at birth. Additionally, these pregnancies with ultrasound-diagnosed fetal macrosomia were more than twice as likely as all pregnancies in the population to end in cesarean delivery

    Surprisingly, the accuracy of ultrasound in assessing fetal weight is similar to that found with simple clinical palpation (feeling the size of the baby through the woman’s abdomen)

    The [average] percentage error of the estimated fetal weight was 8.6% overall. Viewed another way, 44% of the weights were off by more than 10%, and 7% were off by more than 20%.

    The mode of delivery was cesarean section in 66% of the pregnancies, compared with just 29% of all pregnancies in Calgary during the same period. “So it’s [more than] double, the percentage who are getting C-sections, on what is [an inaccurate weight]

    It’s a difficult situation for the care provider when considering what to say to a pregnant woman. Tell any woman her baby might be “big” and she’ll rightly be scared. And this fear can impact the birth and lead to interventions. Conversely, is it ok to say, “Your baby is the perfect size for your pelvis and you’ll birth your baby beautifully”? What if it doesn’t quite work out this way for this woman?

    I like to let women know that size isn’t everything. We all know this! The position of the baby is also really important as is the strength of the contractions, a woman’s morale and motivation, her support team, and the decisions she’ll make with her care provider.

    A woman can have a “small” posterior baby that results in a long labour … or a “large” but well positioned baby that results in a smooth and easy labour. I’ve known many women to have a caesarean with their first baby – women will say, “He didn’t fit. It was a long labour and I only got to 4cm and he was only 3.4Kg” and they go on to have a 4kg baby next time in a four hour labour with no tears.

    My feeling is that it is ok to let a woman know that her baby feels like it might be larger than expected so that the woman can proactively plan for her labour with things like upright positions in labour, positions that open the pelvis and positions that help her to relax. It’s always important to be truthful as this builds trust. It’s also really important to talk about the position of the baby as I often find that a baby’s position in labour is more important than its size. It’s not about creating fear and disappointment by suggesting, “Your baby is h.u.g.e … you’ll need a caesarean for sure. In fact, why don’t we book it in now and you can save yourself hours of labour only to end up with a caesarean?” But rather to explain that the baby feels larger than expected, that babies grow at different rates and that size is not the only important factor. And then work with her to help her to understand positions and strategies that will help her through her labour. In my own practice, only 4% women having their first babies have a caesarean, compared with 25% as the National average for first-time mums. I wonder how many caesareans can be avoided by providing continuity of care for women through pregnancy, birth and the new parenting experience.

    Visit my website to explore homebirth and hospital birth.

    Dutch abandon home birth

    A recent article informs us that:

    RISK OF DEATH INDUCES DUTCH WOMEN TO ABANDON HOME BIRTHS

    It goes on to say that in the last 10 years, the percentage of Dutch women who are giving birth in hospitals has risen from 37% to 75%. They state that reasons for this include:

  • concern at the disproportionally high baby death rate in home birth
  • the rising popularity of epidurals, a pain relief option in labour which is only available in hospitals.
  • The Dutch system of home births has been promoted as one which other countries should emulate, including New Zealand. However, last year a large study found that the perinatal death rate was greater in low risk women who were cared for by midwives than in higher risk women who were cared for by obstetricians. The researchers concluded that the Dutch system of risk selection is not as effective as was once thought.

    I have read the study that has been referred to above. The study concludes that:

    The main finding of this study is that the Dutch obstetric system that is based on risk selection and obstetric care at two levels may not be as effective as was once thought. The Dutch obstetric system itself possibly contributes to the high perinatal mortality compared with most European countries. We found that delivery-related perinatal death was significantly higher among low risk pregnancies in midwife supervised primary care than among high risk pregnancies in obstetrician supervised secondary care.

    The Dutch system relies on a risk assessment. Women are either in primary care or secondary care. Women who are in primary care have midwifery care and they have the option of home birth or hospital birth. The Netherlands currently has a 22% homebirth rate. Women with risk-associated pregnancies have obstetric (secondary) care and give birth in hospital. They might have issues such as high blood pressure, diabetes, twins, a previous caesarean and so on. Overall, 49.5% women remain in primary care at the start oaf labour, and 35% women remain in primary care throughout labour and birth. 65% women either start their pregnancy in secondary care or are transferred to secondary care at some stage in their pregnancy or labour. It is a system that has worked well for many years.

    However, the study has found that the intrapartum (labour and birth) death rate among term babies without congenital malformations (birth defects) was as follows:

  • For babies who started labour in primary (midwifery) care: 0.96/1000
  • For babies who started labour in secondary (obstetric) care: 0.24/1000
  • For births that took place in primary care: 0.91/1000
  • For births that took place in secondary care: 0.45/1000
  • For births that were referred from primary care to secondary care in labour: 1.09/1000
  • Babies of women who were referred from a midwife to an obstetrician during labour had a 3.66 times higher risk of delivery-related perinatal death than did infants of women who started labour supervised by an obstetrician.

    The study concludes that:

    The obstetric care system in the Netherlands may contribute to the high perinatal mortality

    and:

    the Dutch system of risk selection in relation to perinatal death at term is not as effective as was once thought.

    I suggest that there is another major issue involved that has been ignored in the above suggestion. In the Netherlands, midwives book 105 women per year. You read that correctly. While in Australia, midwives care for around 20-40 women per year, in the Netherlands it’s a huge caseload of 105 women per year. Therefore it is impossible for the midwife to personally attend every labour for the duration. Instead, there is a system in place where the women are cared for by a Kraamverzorgenden who stays with the woman during labour and for the first week after the baby is born. This person does not perform any midwifery care but provides support to the woman. The midwife pops in and out every two or four hours to examine the woman and perhaps listen to the baby’s heart beat – I say “perhaps” because there is no official guideline in The Netherlands that this ought to be attended at any specified interval. Hence the midwives check the baby’s heart beat as and when they choose. Acknowledging that the midwife does not sit with each women in labour, it’s plausible that the baby’s heart beat would only be checked every two or four hours. The standard of care for the UK and Australia is that the baby’s heart beat should be checked every 15 minutes in labour and after every contraction in the second stage of labour when the baby is being born. This is identified in the article:

    Of major concern is the fact that the highest mortality was among the infants of women who were referred from primary care to secondary care during labour because of an apparent complication. Hypothetically, this high mortality could have several causes … diagnosis in primary care can be delayed because the midwife is not always present during the first stage of labour and fetal heart beats are often checked only every two to four hours.

    I am interested in why this fundamental issue has not been addressed; rather, a complete review of a system that is in place in other countries – successfully – has been called for?

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Melissa Maimann & Andrew Pesce: Collaborating for success

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    ALTHOUGH only a handful of collaborative arrangements have been signed between obstetricians and midwives since national maternity reforms were introduced in November, calls for a policy rethink are premature and counterproductive.

    In fact, the reforms provide an exciting opportunity for collaborative maternity care that is safe, locally responsive and woman-centred.

    A variety of private maternity care models are possible and we are confident these will build on Australia’s strong record of safety and quality in maternity care. They will also meet the needs of women who want the familiarity and the comfort of knowing the obstetrician and midwife who will be with them through their pregnancy, birth and new parenting experience …

    Obstetricians may be concerned that the new arrangements mean they will not be directly involved in patient care until something goes wrong, while some midwives fear that the arrangements will be used to control midwifery practice, adversely impact on childbirth choices and promote anticompetitive restriction of trade.

    We believe we are the first private obstetrician-midwife team in Australia to have successfully negotiated a formal collaborative arrangement and we are very happy with how it has progressed since our first discussions.

    The first woman under our joint care gave birth in March this year and we have several others booked through to January 2012.

    We share a similar philosophical approach to maternity care and have agreed practice guidelines that we believe to be safe, evidence-based and woman-centred …

    … Women appreciate the continuity of care, and the assurance that an obstetrician they have met will be involved if medical assistance is required. Feedback from women so far has been outstanding. The main criticism has been that this model of care is not available in other hospitals.

    One of the reasons why there are currently so few collaborative arrangements has been the time taken by the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency to endorse eligible midwives and by public maternity units to credential midwives in private practice.

    … Our agreed guidelines are explained to patients before they engage our services and childbirth choices are not restricted. In fact, choices are enhanced as the midwife is able to attend births in the full capacity of a midwife in hospital.

    Importantly, our model of care does not dictate “transfer” of care, merely a shift in the balance of obstetric and midwifery care because we recognise that every pregnant woman needs her own obstetrician and midwife. We support midwife care during waterbirth, vaginal birth after caesarean section, physiological birth positioning and physiological third stage.

    Change is often difficult as we all tend to be creatures of habit. This change brings with it many opportunities for obstetricians and midwives in private practice to work together in ways that are beneficial to both and, importantly, to the women in their care.

    … The maternity reforms will succeed if we remember that midwives and obstetricians are in it for the same reason — to provide safe care that meets the needs of our patients, within a respectful, professional environment.

    Dr Andrew Pesce is an obstetrician practising in Sydney and immediate past president of the AMA. Ms Melissa Maimann is a midwife in private practice based in Sydney.

    Steep rise in first-time mothers being induced

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    A huge jump in first-time mothers having their labour induced is a worrying trend that is putting women at unnecessary risk …

    The proportion of labour induction among women who carried their babies to term rose from 18.6 per cent of all births in 1990, to 26.2 per cent in 2008.

    … and the majority of those [inductions] were carried out before the 41st week of pregnancy.

    … at the same time, the rate of stillbirth remained steady.

    “Induction seems to be increasing and that doesn’t seem to be improving the outcomes for babies,” …

    More older mothers and increases in instances of medical conditions, such as gestational diabetes, explained only some of the rise … Women who were more likely to undergo induction … tended … to have private health insurance.

    … the study was worrying because it showed inductions were often not done for conventional reasons such as high blood pressure or prolonged pregnancy.

    ”Unspecified” reasons were given for between a third and half of all inductions …

    … as the rates of induction had gone up, so had the rate of caesareans. Between 2001 and 2007, fewer than half of the women who had their labour induced went on to have a natural birth, with a third of inductions resulting in caesareans.

    … women were often put under subtle pressure by doctors to undergo inductions and did not have the risks of further interventions explained to them.

    “If you knew your chances of having a normal birth were less than half, you would think more carefully about what is being advised,” she said. “They trust us and they trust the advice that they are getting is correct and that is very concerning.”

    … Women who had a caesarean for their first birth were more likely to have the procedure for subsequent births, leading to increased risks of complications such as the placenta growing through the uterus wall …

    Perhaps a policy needs to be developed whereby all inductions need to be cleared by a committee of at least 2 senior doctors and 2 senior midwives, prior to authorisation by the induction committee. Sometimes a meeting with senior clinicians can help to generate other options instead of resorting to induction. This would, however not be applicable in the private sector, where most of the inductions are performed.

    In NSW in 2008, one private hospital had a 38% induction rate, while another private hospital had a 41% induction rate. At those hospitals, only 1 in 5 women went into labour spontaneously. Interestingly – and perhaps in conflict with this article – at those same hospitals, while around 50% first-time Mums were induced, only 1 on 5 first-time Mums had a caesarean – so it doesn’t necessarily follow that a high induction rate leads to high caesarean rates. Both of those hospitals have caesarean rates that are in-line with the NSW State average.

    I am not suggesting that inductions are wonderful and all women ought to be lining up for them – and the increase in non-indicated inductions is indeed worrying because there should always be a valid reason to bring a pregnancy to an end sooner than nature (and the baby) had intended. There’s no doubt that induction rates and caesarean rates are very high – too high – in private hospitals. But I’m not sure that one is leading to another because the bulk of the caesareans are performed electively, ie, prior to labour starting. The most common reason for an elective caesarean is a previous caesarean (I’ve never accepted that this is even an indication because VBAC is safe … but I’ll have to concede to the majority view that “previous caesarean” is somehow a justifiable reason for another caesarean). Also, as my stats have shown above, despite the huge rate of inductions in first-time Mums, there’s not a corresponding increase in the caesarean rate amongst first-time Mums.

    So, I wonder if there’s something else at play here. I wonder if it has something to do with continuity of care and trust being protective. So that women may be augmented and induced without it impacting the caesarean rate, provided that those women receive continuity of care from someone they trust. In private hospitals where induction rates are higher than in the public sector (along with all types if intervention), women receive continuity of obstetric care and although we might assert that, “women were often put under subtle pressure by doctors to undergo inductions and did not have the risks of further interventions explained to them”, it is also true that, “They trust us and they trust the advice that they are getting”.

    On the other hand, in the public system, continuity of care is not generally a feature of the care provided. Women are often seen by a different midwife or doctor at every visit, they receive impersonal care from a stranger, and by-and-large, they are terrified. Add “induction” to the mix, and viola! You have a caesarean. I wonder if the cause of the caesarean was the lack of continuity of care and trust, rather than the intervention itself. More on that later!

    Home birth has pros and cons

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    The number of at-home births is small but growing as pregnant women weigh the idea of a drug-free and surgery-free birth in a familiar setting versus the risk of harm to the baby in case of complications.

    When most pregnant women go into labor, they pack their bags for the hospital. When Lara Carlos felt the contractions in November 2008, she set up a birthing tub in her bedroom.

    For the next several hours, Carlos alternated between padding around her home and squatting and pushing in the tub. Her midwife poured water down her back and dabbed her forehead with cold towels. When the baby (they chose the name Vincent) arrived at 1:21 a.m., he spent his first few hours cuddling with his parents in their bed.

    Carlos … is one of a small but growing number of women who are choosing to deliver their babies at home. Her first son, Ivan, had been delivered in a hospital, and she says she found labor at home a dramatic improvement.

    “In the hospital, there were seven medical students in the room when I was pushing my son out,” she said. “At home, it was a very quiet, slow experience, and the water helped me to relax.”

    Though home births account for only about 1% of all births each year … they increased by 20% from 2004 to 2008 … The practice is most popular among well-educated mothers who favor natural childbirth without the drugs or surgeries a hospital might use.

    … The increase has reenergized the fierce debate over the safety of at-home delivery. The practice is officially frowned on by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists … because the absence of emergency medical equipment and specialists accustomed to dealing with complications means that problems during labor could cost the baby’s life.

    “All the existing scientific evidence, as well as state and national statistics, make it ultra-clear that home birth increases the risk of death,” …

    The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists does acknowledge that home births are associated with fewer medical interventions than hospital births … 61% of women who had vaginal delivery received an epidural in 2008, the year the report studied. And a 2006 national survey of women’s childbearing experiences showed that 55% were given Pitocin to speed labor.

    “There’s no doubt that once you end up in a hospital, you end up with more interventions — that’s what drives some families away,” … home birth is reasonable as long as women have few risk factors …, have an emergency backup plan and understand the risks involved.

    Women also turn to home birth in order to avoid caesarean sections, which have become more common as obstetricians became increasingly reluctant to take chances at the slightest sign of fetal distress …

    What’s more, many hospitals do not allow women who have previously had a caesarean to attempt a vaginal birth because of the risk of uterine rupture, even though a 2010 National Institutes of Health advisory panel concluded that the risk of uterine rupture during a vaginal birth after one caesarean was just 1% and that more women should be offered the choice. Women wishing to have a VBAC (vaginal birth after caesarean) may have no option but to do so on their own turf.

    Sarah … had two caesareans but chose a home birth for her third pregnancy, successfully delivering a baby girl in January 2010.

    “We had visited numerous hospitals, and the first time I mentioned a VBAC, I was just shut down completely,” Bolson says. Doctors refused to consider it because of the chance of rupture, she recalls, and one said he couldn’t risk having his medical malpractice insurance skyrocket.

    She eventually found a certified professional midwife who was willing to help her deliver at home, with a backup plan of transfer to a nearby hospital. Though initially worried about complications, “after I was able to release the fear, I was free to birth without any inhibition.”

    Many home-birth moms also say they object to other aspects of hospital births, such as having to lie in a bed, abstain from food during labor and be monitored by an army of nurses.

    “I believe in the intuitive power of the human body,” said Mayim Bialik, an actress and natural-birth advocate who has given birth at home. “I believe in having as much privacy as possible, in being able to move freely, to eat when I want, drink when I want, and to be surrounded by the sounds and smells of what is familiar to me.”

    “Other mammals go off on their own to labor,” adds Dr. Stuart Fischbein, a Los Angeles-based obstetrician who has been delivering exclusively in homes since 2010. “When a patient goes to a hospital, she gets told to lay flat on her back strapped down with monitors with constant interruptions from hospital personnel — does that sound conducive to having a normal labor?”

    Arrangements for a home birth go something like this: Early in the pregnancy a woman finds either a … midwife … The midwife provides some or all of the woman’s prenatal care and is on call as the woman approaches her due date …

    During labor, many women use water tubs because they find the water soothing and pain-relieving; others choose to just move about their homes as they see fit. The midwife monitors the fetus’ heart tones with a Doppler device, and most also bring equipment such as oxygen tanks, anti-hemmorhagic medication, local anesthetic and suturing supplies in case of tearing or bleeding. If an emergency arises that the midwife can’t manage, home-birth moms are advised to transfer immediately to a hospital.

    The core of the home-birth debate lies with the safety of the baby — and here, opinions and the data are sharply divided. A 2005 study of 5,418 births in the U.S. and Canada during 2000 … found that the neonatal death rates of at-home births were comparable to those of births in hospitals.

    But a July 2010 analysis published in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology examined the outcomes of 12 home-and-hospital-birth studies and found that babies born at home die at two to three times the rate of those born in hospitals …

    … the distance to the nearest emergency room can sometimes mean the difference between life and death. “Saying, ‘trust birth’ is like saying ‘trust the weather,’” she says, referring to a slogan occasionally used in natural-birth groups.

    Just as vocal online communities have sprung up to promote home birth, so too have others populated by women whose home-birth attempts turned into tragedies … Liz Paparella’s fourth child was stillborn on her living room couch because her midwife failed to take Paparella to the hospital when she began bleeding during labor.

    “I never thought it was more dangerous to have a baby at home than at the hospital,” says Paparella, who had given birth successfully at home two times previously. “In birth, the risk can change from low to high in a matter of minutes.”

    … A clear answer to the safety question is hard to find because nearly every home-birth study has some flaw that is flagged by one side of the debate or the other as invalidating the results. Given this uncertainty, Ouzounian cautions women to research, prepare and choose wisely.

    Home births, he says, should be considered only by those who have a well-trained midwife and are experiencing no complications with their pregnancy …

    “Under the right circumstances, with the right patient selection and with a … midwife attending, the overall maternal complication rates with home births are comparable” to those of a hospital birth …

    But he also advises women not to think about birth in black-or-white terms: There are many ways to make delivery more “natural” even if it takes place in the hospital …

    Fischbein says that doctors could be more accommodating to their patients by providing them with information about all of their birth options — at home and in the hospital — and stand ready to serve as backups for those who wish to labor at home with a midwife.

    “There’s room in this world for low-risk home birthing and for hospital birthing,” he says. “We really should support each individual woman’s right to choose how to deliver her baby.”

    Lack of collaboration stalls maternity reform

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Midwives urge government to relook at legislation.

    The government’s maternity reforms are “doomed to fail” as a result of obstetricians refusing to enter into collaborative arrangements with midwives.

    … “We always feared that these arrangements would be more about control than collaboration,” … only … three [collaborative agreements have been signed] …

    “Midwives are asking obstetricians in writing and calling up to 10 times to organise collaboration. Some get no response, some a polite no and others a very rude no,” …

    “We did expect that this would be the case. When you put one competing professional group over another group competing for the same market share, the group in control isn’t going to do something that threatens their sizeable share. I can understand that they are threatened.”

    It is true that there are only one or two obstetricians who have signed collaborative agreements with midwives, and only one that I know of whose agreement covers labour and birth care. This is disappointing because the models of care that are possible with collaborative agreements between private obstetricians and private midwives are so beneficial for women.

    Vacuum device used during labor; boy, now 11, suffers seizure and developmental problems

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Daniel Bautista-Lorenzo suffers from seizures, developmental delays and chronic headaches.

    Now the 11-year-old boy … claims doctors … caused his injuries by using a risky birthing procedure …

    … Alma Lorenzo went to the hospital for a near-term delivery … and gave birth to her son at 10:55 a.m. the next day …

    “… there were no complications or indications that necessitated the use of a vacuum device,” … “However, McCoy instructed Freed to remove Bautista from the birth canal by performing a vacuum delivery procedure. Freed told McCoy that he had not performed this type of delivery before and he was uncomfortable with the procedure.”

    After the delivery, the newborn “exhibited the symptoms of apparent seizures, left sided blinking of the left eye, and involuntary movement of the left arm,” …

    … a physician “assessed a right frontocerebral hemorrhagic infarction with a subdural hemorrhage,” … Doctors transferred the infant … where he exhibited seizures …

    “… pediatric neurologists came to the consensus that the contusions resulting in the subdural hematoma and bleed in Bautista’s brain were secondary to and caused by the trauma of the vacuum deliver …”

    … neither Freed nor McCoy informed the boy’s Spanish-speaking parents of the risks of and alternatives to a vacuum delivery. Neither doctor obtained written, oral or informed consent from the parents to perform the procedure …

    Vacuum extractors are helpful for some labours and they do save lives. The issue is around the risk / benefit of the procedure, where the doctor ought to be sure that the benefits of the procedure outweigh the risks. This is the same with any procedure, medication, recommendation etc. All interventions carry risks, so the onus is on the treating doctor to ensure that the benefits outweigh the risks. For a woman experiencing a normal labour, a ventouse carries more risks than a normal birth.

    Arizona hospitals taking stricter stance on scheduled births

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Arizona hospitals are taking a stricter stance on doctors and mothers who want to deliver babies before full term.

    Banner Health is the latest to join a growing number of hospitals that are informing doctors and expectant mothers that they will no longer schedule deliveries before 39 weeks of pregnancy unless there is a medical reason to do so.

    Hospitals are citing medical research that shows even the last few weeks of a full-term pregnancy are critical for a newborn’s development. Babies who are born at 39 or 40 weeks are more likely to have improved brain, lung and eye development as well as lower risk of death compared with babies born earlier.

    The change marks a cultural shift for Phoenix-area obstetricians and expectant mothers who have grown accustomed to planning births due to schedules, convenience, family visits or other non-medical reasons.

    … Banner Health will stop scheduling elective C-sections or inducing births for pre-term babies beginning July 18. Banner’s decision will impact 19 hospitals …

    … convenience births represent 20 to 30 percent of all deliveries at some Valley hospitals.

    … 42 percent of babies born … last year were delivered before 39 weeks. Those deliveries covered the spectrum of births, including medically necessary births and natural births that occurred before full term. It included elective C-sections or early inductions of labor, although hospital representatives said they did not have reliable data on the number of such early, elective births.

    The rate of Caesarean births climbed steadily over the past decade … In Arizona, 26.2 percent of all births were by C-section in 2007, up from 16.1 percent in 1996 …

    … [the] reaction has been mixed among doctors and patients. Some doctors have said they’ve successfully induced labor or performed C-sections before 39 weeks and saw no reason to change.

    … doctors have become more receptive to the policy after they reviewed medical data and told their patients about the new hospital policies. It also has emboldened doctors pressured by patients who want to schedule a birth.

    “They changed their culture and basically moved forward and informed patients this is policy now,” …

    Banner Health cited nearly two dozen medical reasons that would prompt an early delivery. Some common medical reasons could include high blood pressure, kidney disease, pre-eclampsia or placenta previa, a condition in which the placenta is too close to the cervix.

    Organizations such as the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecology, Joint Commission and March of Dimes have advocated that the medical community adhere to the 39-week standard.

    … those final weeks can be critical for a newborn’s development. Full-term babies are less likely to have hearing, vision, feeding or birth-weight problems. Those final weeks of a pregnancy also give the lungs, eyes and brain enough time to fully develop.

    Babies born early are more likely to spend time in a neonatal intensive-care unit …

    Judgment errors rank among top reasons for lawsuits against obstetricians

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Errors in clinical judgment, miscommunication and technical mistakes are the three top reasons cited for medical liability cases against obstetricians …

    … Clinical judgment error was cited in 77% of the cases. Miscommunication was mentioned in 36% of the cases, and technical error was noted 26% of the time. Other reasons listed were inadequate documentation, administrative failures and ineffective supervision …

    The three most common allegations within claims were:

    Delayed treatment of fetal distress.
    Improper execution of vaginal delivery.
    Improper management of pregnancy.

    … liability in these cases rarely stems from a single act by one health professional but usually is the result of a series of missteps by a medical team …

    “Obstetrics has some unique vulnerabilities, most often involving situations in which a sequence of errors or oversights cascade into a crisis that can put mother and baby in jeopardy,” … “It is absolutely paramount that [obstetric] practices understand how these missteps unfold, and then focus on education and training initiatives designed specifically to help clinicians avert those mistakes.”

    … The big factors in success are team training and improved communication,” …

    … maternity is significantly safer than it was 50 years ago. Still, claims that go forward result in higher than average legal costs for the profession …

    The rate of obstetric lawsuits is less than one case per 1,000 births. But the average payment for a medical liability case is about $947,000, more than twice that of other specialties.

    Maternity Reforms: Good news for expanded birthing options

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Maternity reforms came into effect in November 2010 which gave women access to Medicare benefits for private midwifery care for the very first time. In addition, eligible midwives were to be able to order relevant tests and ultrasounds through Medicare. Medicare benefits are available to clients of eligible midwives for pregnancy and postnatal care, however there is no benefit for birth care at home.

    So, 6-odd months on, how are things looking for maternity care and what possibilities await us?

    Well, for a start, we had around 200 private midwives in Australia. 6-odd months into the reforms and we have at least 30-40 eligible midwives. Some of those 200 midwives have ceased private practice, leaving about 100 in private practice. So 30-40 eligible midwives represents a 30%-40% update of the maternity reforms by the current private practice workforce in just 6 months. That is phenomenal. As well as this, private practice has become a more attractive option to employed midwives now that private practice is medicare-funded and indemnified. So in months and years to come, we will have more midwives in private practice, and less in the hospital employed system. This is not a concern as the hospitals would not need their own staff: women will bring their midwife with them to the hospital when they come in to birth their babies. From the hospitals’ perspective, this is excellent news: they may benefit from significant cost savings in terms of recruitment, retention, staff education, pay-roll, rostering, management and so on.

    What about for women? Well, it is well-known that women benefit from exclusive one-to-one midwifery care through pregnancy, labour, birth and the postnatal period. When women are cared for exclusively by one midwife, we know that they experience lower rates of interventions without compromising safety, and they experience higher rates of satisfaction with their birth and new parenting experience. When women choose a Eligible midwife, they can access significant medicare benefits that do reduce the cost by quite a lot. Depending on the number of pregnancy and postnatal consultations a woman has, the benefits range from say $1,000 – $2,500.

    However, in order for eligible midwives to provide medicare-rebatable services, midwifery care needs to be delivered within a collaborative arrangement. And this does open the possibility for private midwives and private obstetricians to work together in collaborative practice. The huge benefit to the woman is that she has midwifery care right the way through, from early pregnancy to 6 weeks after her baby arrives, with the reassurance of having a known obstetrician who is available is needed. Women meet the obstetrician twice in pregnancy, and the obstetrician is available for labour and birth if his care is needed, and in this way, women can benefit from the ultimate in continuity of carer. This model of care is now available for the very first time in Australia history, and we are very pleased to be able to offer it to women. So far it is a very popular option! More to come.

    Re-thinking Maternity Care Systems

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    … fewer than 30 per cent of women approaching their first birth attend prenatal classes, and books and the Internet are their primary sources for information about birth.

    Women attending obstetricians were more favourable to the use of birth technology and were less appreciative of women’s roles in their own delivery. In contrast, women attending midwives reported less favourable views toward the use of technology and were more supportive of the importance of women’s roles …

    Even late in pregnancy, questions about epidural analgesia, Caesarean section and episiotomy solicited the most “I don’t know” responses from women who took the survey. But women attending midwives appeared more knowledgeable on these issues.

    “Our findings suggest that obstetricians, midwives and family physicians are caring for different populations of women, with different attitudes and expectations towards childbirth,” … “But regardless of the type of care providers they attended … many women reported uncertainty about benefits and risks of common procedures used at childbirth. This is worrisome because a lack of knowledge affects their ability to engage in informed discussions with their caregivers.”

    A second study, published last month in the journal Birth, compared the attitudes toward birth technology and women’s role in their childbirth between the younger generation of obstetricians and their predecessors.

    Klein and colleagues surveyed 800 Canadian obstetricians who include birth delivery in their practice. Out of 549 respondents, 81 per cent of those 40 years or younger were women (vs. 40 per cent over 40 years of age) …

    … younger obstetricians were significantly more likely to favour the use of routine epidural analgesia and were more concerned about the perceived adverse effects of vaginal birth …

    … the younger generation sees Cesarean section as a solution to many labour and birth problems, and incorrectly sees C-section as safer for both mothers and babies … younger obstetricians are more likely to choose C-section for themselves or their partners, and are less likely to believe women missed out on an important experience by having a C-section.

    … “This study shows it’s generation, not gender, that affects obstetricians’ views about procedures like C-sections,” … “this could present a challenge to efforts to decrease C-section rates in both U.S. and Canada.” As well … up to a third of obstetricians were not evidence-based in their views. This creates concern about informed decision-making, especially for women who are uncertain about procedures that might be used in birth.

    … 75 per cent [of obstetricians] thought home birth was more dangerous than hospital birth … even though home birth by regulated midwives has been shown to be safe in Canada.

    … “These three studies taken together show us that educational leaders and provincial policy-makers need to seriously examine the educational models and experiences that appear to teach the non-evidence-based view that vaginal childbirth is primarily a dangerous activity,” … ” … we need more midwives … while obstetricians in training will need to have more experience with normal birth, and in the future, restrict their role to that of consultants to midwives … In this way they can maximize the appropriateness of their surgical training.

    “This means rethinking the design of the entire Canadian maternity care system. Finally, if women are to be empowered with the information that they need to dialogue with their providers, new forms of accurate information transfer will need to be developed.”

    Mums-to-be urged to stress less

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Mums-to-be shouldn’t worry unnecessarily about potential risks during their pregnancy, with Perth researchers suggesting that over-inflated perceptions of risk could be causing more harm than the risks themselves.

    … overestimating risk in pregnancy can lead to higher stress levels in pregnant women which in turn can have a negative impact on the unborn child’s future physical and mental health.

    … while obstetric care in Australia has come a long way, risk in pregnancy has not been eliminated altogether and the baseline risk for birth defects is estimated at up to 5% regardless of risk exposure.

    … “Pregnant women are inundated with do’s and don’ts during pregnancy, and along with this is an expectation that a healthy baby will be assured if a woman does everything right.”

    “This can lead to a heightened sense of awareness of risks, and to a feeling of personal blame if something goes wrong. This can all result in women over-estimating the risks involved with pregnancy, particularly exposures during pregnancy.”

    There are a number of factors that may influence the development of an over-estimation of risk … The Thalidomide disaster of the early 1960s and the suffering that it caused also diminished the public trust in the safety of medication during pregnancy.

    Dr Robinson said higher stress during pregnancy can also lead to increased stress for the mother postnatally.

    “A stressful pregnancy is linked to an increased risk for postnatal depression. What we are concerned about is that the stress caused by over-estimating risks present during pregnancy may be causing more damage than the feared risks themselves,” …

    “To promote accurate and sensible risk assessment, it is important to develop a relationship of trust between the patient and the person providing obstetric care, be it an obstetrician, midwife, GP or other professional involved in the perinatal period.”

    Dr Robinson said it would also be useful to support women who are anxious or worried about risks during pregnancy through increased antenatal education, and through available psychological services within maternity hospitals and the community.

    Is ‘tribal’ obstetric culture endangering mothers and babies?

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    How we are born, who supports mothers and the quality of the care provided during birth are vital to good public health and personal well being. But all is not well in modern birthing in spite of the advances of modern medicine.

    In the United Kingdom, health policies aim to keep childbirth normal or natural and dynamic …

    In Australia, a national Review of Maternity Services (MSR) in 2009-10 generated heated public debate. It spawned critiques of the medical control of birth and the self-interest of privately practising obstetricians.

    Its outcomes remain hotly contested, particularly over women’s access midwives and home birthing.

    Much health policy now promotes strategies to improve quality and safety as being critical to good patient-centred care.

    But the Maternity Services Review overlooked some problems in the culture of obstetrics.

    … It is their philosophy and practices that have shaped the system of modern hospitalized childbirth care.

    The obstetric profession … is accountable for making sure neither practitioners nor the systems of care cause harm to women and their babies.

    … several public inquiries … showed that harm was not just being caused but was covered up.

    … painful details of serious harm done by doctors to women in maternity units, including unnecessary hysterectomies, assault, and even genital mutilation.

    … Most worrying were the common patterns of denial: stories of damage to women were mostly not reported by colleagues out of professional or “tribal” loyalty.

    Until the cases became public, they were seen just as “mistakes” or medical “misdemeanours”, or as caused by individual “bad apples” in the profession.

    Even many anaesthetists, pathologists and midwives colluded in keeping silent about women’s tragedies.

    … Individual, institutional and systemic problems are interwoven. Viewing childbirth care as a field full of power though allows us also to see how it can be reformed.

    Encouragingly, the public inquiries point to changing times: women as health care consumers used the press to agitate for these inquiries and have lobbied for wider reform.

    Midwives have also been speaking up about problems in the system.

    Some obstetricians, too, are committed to the reform of professional practice …

    But we need to go even further.

    Obstetric undergraduate and postgraduate education also needs reform. More critical reflection on the profession’s gendered and racialized power is necessary, and greater awareness of public health and social issues.

    Professional bodies … should also be expected … to develop mechanisms for critical self-examination of attitudes toward women.

    Similarly, doctors need to engage seriously with midwives’ concerns about policies pushing “inter-professional collaboration”.

    Too often, these seem to be on medical terms and experienced as continued domination rather than an equal, respectful relationship.

    High quality obstetric care remains essential for women with complex medical problems … It should be effectively supported by public funds but obstetricians are accountable for how they use them.

    … “Birth is not an illness”. Quality and safety in maternity care should not be equated with providing obstetric care.

    Women deserve real choice and autonomy in childbirth. Improving care requires more than good hospital incident-reporting systems and support for staff to report medical errors. These are valuable but not enough.

    Cultural change in maternity care institutions and health professions, and in the broader society’s views of childbirth care, is essential if we are to keep mothers and babies safe from harm.

    QLD: Mums-to-be pushed into caesareans with private hospitals leading the way

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    SOME of the state’s biggest private hospitals are performing caesareans on more than half the women giving birth …

    The caesarean rates among the highest in the country were uncovered in hospital birth statistics from 2007-2010 obtained by The Sunday Mail under Right to Information laws.

    Queensland’s “caesars palace” was the North West Brisbane Private Hospital, which performed the surgery on 56.8 per cent of women giving birth. Toowoomba’s St Vincent’s Hospital and The Wesley Hospital in Brisbane rounded out the Top 3, with rates of 54.8 per cent and 51.8 per cent respectively.

    The latest figures … will reignite the turf war between midwives, who espouse natural birth, and obstetricians who defend surgical intervention.

    Caesarean births are recommended as safer options for women having large babies, twins or breech births, as well as older mums and women who have had previous caesareans.

    Latest recommendations from Canada suggest that vaginal birth is safest for most breech babies. NSW Health promotes vaginal birth for twins and of course we know that vaginal birth after a caesarean is safer than elective repeat caesarean provided that the birth takes place in a facility that has resources available to perform an emergency caesarean if needed. And “big” babies? This cannot be known with any accuracy ahead of time and the current recommendation is for a planned vaginal birth.

    But some critics say growing numbers of medical professionals are convincing mothers to undergo caesareans just to streamline private maternity ward schedules and maximise revenue.

    Across the state the figures add weight to the theory, with caesareans accounting for 27.6 per cent of births in public hospitals and a huge 48.3 per cent in private hospitals.

    We know that this difference is not comprised of women requesting caesareans: only 2-3% women actually request a caesarean. Most are told they “need” a caesarean because their baby is “big” (3.3Kg), “late” at 39 weeks and 6 days, a previous caesarean, breech, twins, IVF, mum is “overweight”, mildly elevated blood pressure (130/80) and so on. I have heard all of these and more, as “valid” reasons for caesarean.

    Several new mothers approached by The Sunday Mail last week said they had been pushed into having caesareans by private hospital obstetricians after initially wanting to give birth naturally.

    One Coolum mum, 45, said her obstetrician told her she had “no choice” because the baby would “not fit through my birthing canal”.

    This can not be known ahead of time. The only way to find out is to labour and see how it goes. Dedicated, exclusive, one-to-one midwifery care in labour from a midwife who is know to the woman by name and trusted by the woman, is the most important factor in ensuring a normal birth.

    … “I just wanted a natural birth, to me that was important …

    I think personal responsibility also plays a part here. If a woman genuinely wants a natural birth, she needs to consider which care provider will maximise her chances of achieving this. Consumers of any service are wise to research options thoroughly before they go ahead with them. We do more research about buying a car, house or holiday than we do when choosing our care providers. Having chosen an ill-suited care provider, it is never too late to change.

    Another mum … desperate to avoid a caesarean, said her obstetrician also tried to book an induction because she had passed her due date in the Christmas-New Year period.

    “The obstetrician said we can book you in for an induction because we just don’t like calling people in on public holidays,” …

    But doctors point the finger at today’s “too posh to push” mothers, who they say demand caesars, as well as older mothers who have an added risk with vaginal births.

    Australian College of Midwives spokeswoman Professor Jenny Gamble said the health system was driven by profit.

    “It’s all about less night disturbance and more throughput; it all comes down to money,” she said. “It’s a fee-for-service model the more women obstetricians see, the more they earn.”

    Australian Medical Association Queensland president Dr Gino Pecoraro rejected as “urban myth” claims that obstetricians earned more for caesarean births.

    Private Hospitals Association Queensland said birthing decisions were not made by the hospital.

    This is true: hospitals do not make any decisions about birth: those decisions are made by the doctor and patient. As we have read in this article, many of the decisions are “guided” by the doctor. The other factor in these escalating caesarean rates is litigation. When caesarean rates increase and doctors are reluctant to attend VBACs, the caesarean rate will automatically increase.

    Not all doctors have high caesarean rates and some are very supportive of normal birth BUT … if a woman genuinely wants a normal birth, the best advice is to go a normal birth specialist.

    Doctors admit C-section error in tragic baby’s botched birth

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    TWO consultants have admitted to the parents of a baby deprived of oxygen at birth they should have performed a caesarean section earlier.

    Baby Senan Michael Christopher Dodd was born at Mount Carmel Hospital, Dublin, on March 28, 2008.

    There was a delay in performing the emergency birth procedure and the baby boy suffered severe brain damage due to oxygen deprivation …

    He died … on March 30, 2008.

    Two consultants obstetricians … acknowledged … the caesarean section should have been performed earlier.

    Dr Rafferty said he contributed to the delay in delivering the baby and expressed his “profound apologies” to the baby’s parents …

    [The] Midwife … told the court she called Dr Rafferty to review Roberta … due to lack of progress of labour, following an hour of active pushing.

    The doctor said he gave the parents the option of a caesarean section or of an epidural with syntocinon …

    Syntocinon and an epidural were administered.

    But the doctor failed to look back at the trace of the foetal heartbeat, which indicated a slow heart rate at 2.45pm and another slow rate after pushing began.

    … He told the inquest he should have, “been more direct and said a C-section was the way to go”.

    He agreed with counsel for the family, Bruce Antoniotti, that he did not tell the Dodds there was foetal distress because he failed to perceive it, as he failed to look back far enough on the trace.

    The baby’s heart rate was monitored intermittently …

    This is the standard of care for women in normal labour with a healthy pregnancy and baby.

    Dr Valerie Donnelly, who took over from Dr Rafferty, reviewed Mrs Dodd around 6.20pm after a prolonged period of slow foetal heart rate.

    Dr Donnelly proceeded as planned and recommenced the syntocinon although it had been turned off by the midwife, who was preparing for a C-section.

    “I regret I did not deliver the baby by C-section at that point. I believe my delay in making the decision to deliver him by caesarean section has contributed to his death,” …

    Medical Malpractice Case Nets $58 Million Verdict

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Three years after the same case resulted in a hung jury, a second Waterbury jury returned a $58 million verdict against a local gynecologist …

    Trial lawyers … convinced the jury that the doctor had breached the standard of care by not starting a caesarian section delivery in time.

    … the mother was in her 39th week of pregnancy. According to the defense, the standard of care was to not deliver a baby before 40 weeks of gestation …

    … the case was the highest medical malpractice verdict in Connecticut history.

    … “It was a complete runaway verdict, unsupported by the evidence. It’s not only uncollectable; it’s unsupportable.”

    … The couple used in vitro fertilization to have their first and only child … When the mother visited the doctor for her checkup … her level of amniotic fluid was at half the normal level. “Our expert said that is an indication there is something wrong with the baby, and it has to be delivered that day, by caesarian section,” … Delivery, however, was delayed.

    … “Our expert said that with that kind of drop in the fluid, you have to deliver this baby.”

    Two days later the mother went into labor. By the time they got her down to the operating room, the baby appeared to be stuck in breach birth …

    For the next three or four minutes, they struggled to get the baby out. When he was born, his only sign of life was a heartbeat. … They resuscitated him, but he developed cerebral palsy,” …

    The child needs extensive home care …

    Midwives not Confident to Lead Normal Births ???

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    This article was a bit grrr to read! Essentially, a small hospital – serviced by midwives and GP Obstetricians – is facing a crisis where the GP Obstetricians are no longer able to offer an obstetric service. It is a low-risk unit that transfers any high risk women and babies in pregnancy or labour – most issues would arise in pregnancy, or would even be apparent at booking-in. The role of the midwife is to care for low risk pregnancies and births on his/her own authority. Yet as you’ll read below, the Director of Nursing (who for some odd reason comments on a service that is not related to the one that she directs) allows these midwives – who she understands cannot perform in their role – to continue to practice in the hospital. Does this happen anywhere else? If your optometrist can’t examine your eyes, or your dentist can’t check your teeth or do a basic filling, we wouldn’t consider them fit to practice. Do members of the public expect that their health practitioners are able to perform in their roles? Maybe we do have this expectation, but the Director of Nursing in this article doesn’t agree. Perhaps they need a Director of Midwifery?

    Kerang District Health was one of the big winners from north-west Victoria in this year’s budget … but despite this welcome injection of funds, there is some concern about how the hospital will continue to offer maternity services …

    Kerang District Health does not deal with high risk birthing situations …

    … following the announcement that Kerang’s three GP obstetricians will no longer be working in this area beyond the end of this year, the hospital’s CEO, Rob Jarman, says the limited services that are offered are under threat.

    … Though there are around 12-15 midwives, Ms Hendrick says that they are currently not confident enough to lead the births and that in some cases an obstetric doctor is the only option.

    … Kerang is working on updating the skills of their midwives – and Ms Hendrick says she hopes that with this will come an increase in confidence that will enable a greater involvement of the midwives in the care of the mothers during the birth.

    The article goes on to talk about a woman who had her baby by emergency caesarean at the hospital, and thank god there were doctors there to save everyone because who knows what would have happened if there had “only” been midwives around? I’m not suggesting that doctors aren’t needed at births and that they shouldn’t be involved in the care of pregnant and birthing women – in fact, I work collaboratively with an obstetrician for the majority of the clients who book-in with me, and I love working this way. What I am saying is that midwives must be competent to perform in their roles – as care providers for normal pregnancy and normal birth – and to know when to consult and refer to our obstetric colleagues.

    Ina May Gaskin: Are We Having Babies All Wrong?

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Ina May Gaskin started delivering babies in 1970 while on a hippie cross-country trip known as the caravan. She had no medical training, just a … gut feeling that women deserved kinder, gentler births. When the hundreds of caravaners settled in Tennessee on what they called the Farm, Gaskin and several other women began delivering the community’s babies at home … Word got around when Gaskin wrote about her successes in Spiritual Midwifery, and a movement was born.

    Today, women still travel far and wide to give birth on the Farm, and Gaskin’s methods have the respect of clinicians around the world …

    You started attending births with no formal medical training. How did you know you could do it?
    I knew how to deal with potential complications because kind doctors helped me. But basically I was behaving the way my aunt, who had a farm, would around any laboring mammal. You don’t disturb her, you don’t upset her. She deserves peace and quiet and respect. Doing that meant that no C-sections were necessary for the first 200 births on the Farm.

    The C-section rate on the Farm is very low, under 2% for about 3,000 births, while the average in the U.S. for low-risk women is 20%. Can you explain?
    It’s very rare to see an undisturbed birth in a modern U.S. teaching hospital, but when you see a woman who isn’t frightened, who’s giving birth without interference, you stand back in awe and realize how little needed you are except in the rare circumstance. That doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t be around in case there is a problem. It just means that you should be able to tell when there’s a problem, and you should be able to tell how not to create problems.

    Why the title Birth Matters? Who are you trying to convince?
    Lately, I’ve been thinking we really need to get men interested in birth … fathers-to-be have a very strong protective instinct … Men instantly understand what I call “sphincter law.” You don’t try to defecate while lying flat on your back tied to various machines with somebody shouting at you! Why do we, then, continue to treat women as if their emotions and comfort, and the postures they might want to assume while in labor, are against the rules?

    … If birth matters, midwives matter. In Europe, there are hospitals where the cesarean rate is less than 10%, and you’ll find midwives in these hospitals …

    Do you talk this frankly to obstetricians when you give grand rounds at major hospitals? Do they take offense?
    A lot of OBs aren’t happy about the high cesarean rate either. Malpractice-insurance companies have become the boss of obstetricians. It used to be that OBs were taught skills to deliver twins and breech babies vaginally. Now all they can really offer is surgery … When I go into hospitals, I talk about how we do things on the Farm. I love talking to OBs. We midwives and physicians have a lot to teach each other.

    Some Fla. ob-gyns refuse obese patients

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Some South Florida obstetrics-gynecology physicians say they are refusing healthy patients who are obese or very overweight because they riskier to treat.

    A poll of 105 obstetrics-gynecology practices by the South Florida Sun Sentinel indicates 15 have some type of weight cutoff for new patients — some start at 200 pounds, some 250 pounds.

    Some of the doctors say they fear for their exam tables or other equipment, but others say they are trying to avoid higher complication rates.

    … “There’s more risk of something going wrong and more risk of getting sued. Everything is more complicated with an obese patient in [gynecology] surgeries and in [pregnancies].” …

    Obesity, elective cesarean contribute to U.S. maternal mortality rate

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    In the 14 years that I’ve worked in the world of obstetrics, I’ve witnessed three maternal deaths. All three occurred in the immediate postpartum period, all were unexpected, and all were devastating for everyone involved, but most of all for the families and children left without a mother.

    In the U.S., when a woman goes into the hospital to have a baby everyone expects that she will come home a few days later, happy and healthy, with a new baby. While this is usually the case, maternal death does still occur.

    … Women in the US are more likely to die from pregnancy-related causes than women in Canada, Poland, Croatia and Greece, just to name a few. And black women in the United States are four times more likely to die from pregnancy-related problems than white women.

    … it has changed little over the past 20 years. The Joint Commission on Hospital Accreditation has warned that the maternal mortality rate may be increasing once again.

    … why are mothers still dying in the United States when we spend more on health care than any other country in the world?

    Some of the most common causes of maternal death in this country are hemorrhage, postpartum blood clots and underlying cardiac disease.

    The CDC cites the rise of obesity and elective cesarean rates as possible contributing factors to the problem. Hypertension, diabetes and asthma — all culprits in pregnancy-related complications — are all more common in obese women.

    Although the risks of cesarean birth are relatively minimal, studies have shown a higher mortality rate when compared to vaginal birth …

    Labouring over options for pain relief

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Ma.Fe Jackson didn’t want to miss any part of the birthing experience, so she refused to have an epidural …

    “Childbirth is very, very painful, but that’s normal and it’s only for a short time,” says the new mom who gave birth in February to first baby, Angelique.

    Jackson is Filipino and most Filipinos don’t have epidurals, she explains. Besides, she’s scared of needles, which is how an epidural is administered.

    Pain may be a normal part of childbirth, but most North American women today don’t experience it.

    In Edmonton in 2009, 57 per cent of the 11,782 women who gave birth in hospital asked for an epidural … The majority of those who didn’t have an epidural had some other form of pain relief …

    Thirty years ago only two to four per cent of women had epidurals.

    “We only used them for longer, more complicated labours,” … “There was a general desire to have a natural childbirth because there was a feeling that birth had become medicalized.

    “Now, I would say the majority of women are coming in and they’ve already decided that they will have an epidural as soon as they get into labour. It’s really swung the other way.”

    Even women who plan to have an epidural only as a last resort, usually end up having one …

    Dr. Michael Klein, a family physician, pediatrician and neonatologist from Vancouver, thinks the trend reflects the lack of knowledge that women having babies, especially first babies, have about labour and delivery.

    His maternity research … shows one-third to one-half … aren’t fully informed about childbirth, including the effects of an epidural.

    That may have something to do with the fact that only one-third of first-time moms-to-be sign up for prenatal classes. The majority get their information, or misinformation, as Klein calls it, from highly questionable Internet websites.

    A similar survey of 5,000 health providers who care for these women, found they too were similarly lacking in information, says Klein, professor emeritus of family practice and pediatrics at the University of British Columbia, and senior scientist emeritus at the Child and Family Research Institute in Vancouver.

    Although the epidural is considered safe, there are risks …

    “ … epidural headache, and in very rare cases you could have a significant neurological problem because of it,” …

    “ … it will lengthen the first and second stages of your labour significantly, that you’re more likely to have an epidural fever, and that it increases the likelihood of forceps or vacuum … You’re more likely to have an episiotomy or perineal trauma, and the issue of caesarean sections tend to be avoided altogether because doctors actually believe that even an early epidural will not cause a problem.”

    … in general, younger obstetricians (under age 40), were more supportive of the role of birth technology in normal birth, including routine epidural analgesia, than physicians over 40, and they were less appreciative of the role of women in their own birth. They also saw caesarean section as a solution to many perceived labour and birth problems.

    “ … I think women really need to know the full picture,” he adds. If they were fully informed he believes fewer women would ask for an epidural.

    Klein is best known for his research that found routine episiotomies caused the very problems they’re supposed to prevent …

    … Klein acknowledges that birth is painful, but argues many women would be able to handle it without drugs if they had support.

    “There is a difference between pain and suffering, and no one is in favour of suffering,” Klein says. “You suffer when you are abandoned, when people aren’t there to help you with your pain.

    “Nobody is going to deny there is pain in labour nor that it is significant, but if you are cared for by somebody who understands the pain and tells you only have a contraction or two as intense as this until you’re fully dilated and you’ll be much more in control of the pain, if you had that kind of information, you might decide to hold off (having pain relief).”

    … “Midwifery intervention has positive outcomes that no other intervention that we have to offer in medicine can even touch. If we all practised that way we wouldn’t be having this discussion,” …

    Childbirth: More Labor Interventions, Same Outcomes

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Hospitals vary considerably in the frequency with which they induce labor and perform Caesarean sections. But a new study finds that these differences do not seem to affect how newborns fare in these facilities.

    Dr. J. Christopher Glantz, a professor of obstetrics at the University of Rochester, reviewed records of almost 30,000 births … Some hospitals relied heavily on induced labor and Caesarean sections, while others performed the procedures much less often.

    Dr. Glantz measured neonatal outcomes in three ways: whether a child was moved to an intensive care hospital, whether a child needed immediate assisted ventilation and whether a child received a low Apgar score.

    He found no difference in outcomes for babies born in the hospitals with the highest rates of these procedures and those with the lowest. The result suggests that routine reliance on the procedures does little to improve outcomes …

    The recipe for safe, empowering, minimal-intervention birthing is:
    A woman who is positively motivated to have a natural birth
    Who is well-prepared for pregnancy, labour, birth and parenthood
    Who is supported by one midwife and one obstetrician right the way through her pregnancy, birth and postnatal experience
    Care providers who collaborate, communicate, respect and trust one another, who work for the best interests of the woman and her baby

    Probe into mass Caesarean birth

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    Inquiries were ordered … into allegations that gynaecologists … had conducted several Caesarean operations without waiting for the actual delivery date, so that the doctors could proceed on leave.

    … patients [alleged] that 21 Caesarean operations were conducted in a span of two days, on Wednesday and Thursday, so that four gynaecologists could proceed on leave from Friday to Sunday.

    … The Director of Health Services … has initiated a probe into the issue …

    Pioneering Collaborative Private Maternity Care: Continuity, woman-centered, personalised, safe.

    Our brand new model of care – launched for the first time in Australia – has recently welcomed its third baby. So far, three families have benefited from a collaborative model of private maternity care that enables women to have care with a private midwife (with Medicare funding) and also develop a trusting and nurturing relationship with a Specialist Obstetrician who is available for the pregnancy, labour and birth. Our service has so far supported an empowered birth after caesarean, a waterbirth and a natural birth. All within a hospital setting, with all the support available that is occasionally needed.

    We’ve received some really positive feedback:

    “The collaborative model seemed unique to me. To have a private midwife and our own birth experience but in a hospital with an obstetrician who was known to us as back-up in case of unexpected complications, allowed us to feel totally comfortable and confident for our first baby.”
    “I felt entirely supported and encouraged.”
    “A highly personalised level of care was offered which makes you feel listened to and allows time for lots of questions.”
    “I liked the fact that we got time to develop a relationship and feel comfortable together, allowing us a better birth experience. Postnatally, it was nice to have the same person continuing my care. It was highly personalised.”

    Our model sees women booking with me for their care. Women who are interested in having collaborative maternity care meet with the obstetrician early in their pregnancy and again between 32 and 36 weeks. Women see the obstetrician more often if additional visits with him are needed. Otherwise, I am in frequent communication with him and we work together to provide safe, evidence-based, woman-centered care to our pregnant women. This allows women to build a sense of connection, trust and continuity.

    We support natural birth, active birth, physiological birth positions, physiological third stage, water birth, VBAC, twin births, breech births … and so on. Women are really well prepared for natural birth with an emphasis on informed decision making and woman-centered care. Childbirth education is included, as well as access to a lending library of books and DVDs.

    Birth care is provided initially at home and then we move to hospital where I provide full midwifery care. The birth is attended by myself and the Obstetrician if needed / desired. It’s an intimate, calm, peaceful experience and facilitates a gentle and safe birth.

    After we have welcomed the baby and birthed the placenta, women generally stay in hospital for 4 – 24 hours before returning home. Of course, if there are any issues women are welcome to stay longer, but generally I find that women feel more comfortable in their own homes, in their own beds. I visit at home every day for a week and continue care for 6 weeks. Since women book into hospital as a private patient, they are almost assured a private room with an en-suite.

    I’m really excited about this model of care because it meets the needs of women so perfectly:

  • Women having their first babies, maybe feeling unsure of what to expect
  • Women who previously experienced dis-continuous care from care providers who were unknown to them
  • Women who are planning a natural birth but perhaps with a more challenging pregnancy
  • Women who want a home birth / birth centre birth but with a known obstetrician available if needed
  • Women who really desire a sense of control over their birthing experience
  • This is a new way of working for both midwives and obstetricians and is a really supportive and nurturing way to practice. There is a huge potential for professional growth and learning. The most positive element, however, is the radiant smiles on the faces of the women who have birthed with us and the babies who have received a safe and gentle start to life.

    Baby death shows need for collaborative care

    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    The death of a baby during delivery demonstrates the need for collaborative arrangements between doctors and midwives …

    A coronor ruled this week that a baby girl who died of asphyxia … had not been “adequately monitored” during labour and could have potentially been saved if the midwife had referred the case to an obstetrician earlier on.

    … coroner John Hutton, made 21 recommendations, many of which involved models of collaborative care to ensure women and their babies are better protected from inadequate care.

    President of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RANZCOG), Dr Rupert Sherwood said the inquest highlighted why the college has always insisted on collaborative arrangements between doctors and midwives.

    … “This highlights two critical aspects of good collaborative care between midwives and doctors.

    “Namely the importance of following established protocols such as fetal heart monitoring when indicated, and timely referral to another member of the team with training and expertise to intervene in a safe and timely manner’ …

    New limits for older mothers

    MEDICARE NOW AVAILABLE FOR MIDWIFERY CARE THROUGH THIS SERVICE!
    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    DOCTORS should induce older mums by 40 weeks or risk stillbirths, findings from the country’s biggest study into perinatal deaths has revealed.

    … the current policy of inducing labour at 41 weeks for all pregnant women needs to be reviewed for mothers aged 40 or older.

    … pregnant women aged 40 or older faced much higher risk of stillbirths once they reached their due date compared to younger mothers.

    … the general policy in hospitals was to induce birth at 41 weeks, with the risk of stillbirth 2.2 times higher for all mothers past their due dates. But the prognosis was more dire for older mothers, with the risk sharply rising from 38 weeks.

    … One of the key findings was that babies who died in stillbirth tended to move less in the final trimester, despite the widely held belief that babies slowed their movements towards the end of pregnancy.

    “People often get told that the baby slows down,” … “We found that … for people who have a healthy pregnancy outcome – it seems to be much more common that for the last few weeks prior to the interview, the baby movements become stronger.”

    … viral infections were not as significant as previously thought because they appeared to be just as common in healthy births.

    Urinary tract infections were more common in the mothers who lost a baby …

    The Cradle

    MEDICARE NOW AVAILABLE FOR MIDWIFERY CARE THROUGH THIS SERVICE!
    Visit my website to explore home birth, hospital birth and Medicare-funded private midwifery care.

    Link

    A brand-new hospital has opened its doors in Melbourne. The Cradle is a 5-star private hospital providing 24/7 obstetric, anaesthetic, paediatric and midwifery cover. This hospital has successfully filled a “gap” in our private maternity sector: the majority of private hospitals do not offer 24/7 specialist medical cover; now, The Cradle is able to offer this. Is it beneficial to mothers and babies? The article below discusses the issues.

    THERE may not be a doorman or a porter to take your luggage, but everything else about The Cradle in Hawthorn, which claims to be Australia’s first five-star maternity hospital, feels like a luxury hotel.

    There are marble foyers and polished floorboards. The private suites have double beds, flat-screen TVs, lavish ensuites — and 24-hour room service.

    … women and their partners who stay at The Cradle … will be offered fine dining and an impressive wine list …

    … The Cradle also claims its 30-bed facility … will offer better care … by having a ‘‘rested’’ obstetrician, pediatrician, anaesthetist and theatre staff in-house 24 hours a day.

    At Melbourne’s dozen or so other private maternity hospitals, most of these staff are on call after hours.

    … The Cradle claims it will be the only private maternity hospital that will have all of those specialists on duty 24 hours a day.

    … The Cradle can’t, however, guarantee that a woman’s own obstetrician will deliver her baby — a key reason why women choose to go private. If the birth occurs after hours the baby is likely to be delivered by the rostered obstetrician.

    … Clare McGinness … says there is nothing wrong with obstetrics care in Australia and The Cradle’s claim of providing ‘‘a greater level of care’’ is a ploy to worry women into paying more for unnecessary services.

    … ”There is a lot more involved in delivering a high quality of care to women than having these specialists at a hospital 24/7. It’s really about having the right people at the right time with the right skills. It’s about having competent midwives who can assess a woman and know when to call an obstetrician, who can be here within half an hour … This is the model we’ve worked with very successfully for 60 years.”

    Damian Armour, executive director at Epworth Freemasons Hospital, says The Cradle’s claim of a safer environment for mothers and babies ”has the potential to make women feel a bit anxious about their choices” …’

    Many women who choose a hospital birth in the private system will find it reassuring to know that there are round-the-clock obstetric, midwifery, paediatric and anaesthetic staff available. Hopefully this will be a model of care that can flourish to promote choices for women. An identified weakness of this model is that women who birth their babies after-hours may not have their own obstetrician, and certainly they will not have met the midwife who will attend them. Time will tell if this weakness is overcome by the strength of the hospital’s specialist medical cover but whatever the outcome, it’s wonderful that some diversity will now exist in the private maternity system.

    Continuity of midwifery care and gestational weight gain in obese women: a randomised controlled trial

    MEDICARE NOW AVAILABLE FOR MIDWIFERY CARE THROUGH THIS SERVICE!
    Want to know more about home birth, hospital birth or Medicare-funded private midwifery care? Email Melissa Maimann or call 0400 418 448.

    Link

    The increased prevalence of obesity in pregnant women in Australia … is a significant public health concern. Obese women are at increased risk of serious perinatal complications and guidelines recommend weight gain restriction and additional care.

    There is limited evidence to support the effectiveness of dietary and physical activity lifestyle interventions in preventing adverse perinatal outcomes and new strategies need to be evaluated. The primary aim of this project is to evaluate the effect of continuity of midwifery care on restricting gestational weight gain in obese women to the recommended range.

    The secondary aims of the study are to assess the impact of continuity of midwifery care on: women’s experience of pregnancy care; women’s satisfaction with care and a range of psychological factors.

    Methods: A two arm randomised controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted with primigravid women recruited from maternity services in Victoria, Australia. Participants will be primigravid women, with a BMI[greater than or equal to]30 who are less than 17 weeks gestation.

    Women allocated to the intervention arm will be cared for in a midwifery continuity of care model and receive an informational leaflet on managing weight gain in pregnancy. Women allocated to the control group will receive routine care in addition to the same informational leaflet.

    Weight gain during pregnancy, standards of care, medical and obstetric information will be extracted from medical records …

    Increasingly, midwifery continuity models of care are being introduced in low risk maternity care, and information on their application in high risk populations is required. There is an identified need to trial alternative antenatal interventions to reduce perinatal risk factors for women who are obese and the findings from this project may have application in other maternity services.

    A fantastic research study and I would be very interested to learn the results. It is well-known that continuity of midwifery care is beneficial for low-risk women; the unanswered question remains: how does continuity of midwifery and obstetric care benefit women with complicated pregnancies? My hunch is that this form of care is most beneficial for women and babies.

    To find out more about the services I offer, please visit my website or call me on 0400 418 448.

    Specific Genetic Mutations Associated With Preeclampsia

    MEDICARE NOW AVAILABLE FOR MIDWIFERY CARE THROUGH THIS SERVICE!
    Want to know more about home birth, hospital birth or Medicare-funded private midwifery care? Email Melissa Maimann or call 0400 418 448.

    Link

    Specific genetic mutations in women with autoimmune diseases are associated with preeclampsia … investigation … has revealed an association between similar mutations and preeclampsia in women without any underlying autoimmune disease …

    … The authors studied specific genes … and found that 7 of the 40 [women] had a mutation in one of these genes … 5 of 59 women who did not have an autoimmune disease but who developed preeclampsia, had mutations in MCP or factor I.

    … the results … suggest new genetic targets for the treatment of preeclampsia and raise the possibility of developing tests to identify women at risk of developing preeclampsia …

    To find out more about the services I offer, please visit my website or call me on 0400 418 448.