Risk assessment in pregnancy and birth

Risk assessment has been around for a long time in maternity care and has become more widely spoken about as midwifery-led services have expanded. Risk assessment is a way of identifying potential problems and minimising risks to the woman and baby. Some form of risk assessment is used in almost every profession and although the actual risk assessment process is not perfect, it’s the best tool we have at present. Risk assessment is used on OH&S, education, food service, health, media, emergency services, law and so on.

In maternity, risk assessment is an incredibly useful tool. The benefit of risk assessment is that it is based on science and evidence. We can state with certainty the risks of certain complications such as pre-eclampsia and this is helpful when preparing women for what to expect and things to be on the look-out for. In this way, risk assessment actually lowers the risk to the woman because she can become more involved in her care and more alert for signs that mean she needs to get help.

The downside of risk assessment is that it does tend to categorise women according to a tick-box system. Although the risk might be there, it might not necessarily eventuate for the woman sitting with us.

How can risk assessment be useful?

Risk assessment can be an incredibly useful tool for both women and midwives in helping to plan care that will meet the woman’s needs safely. Midwives are primary care providers and are responsible for proving care to healthy, low-risk women and babies throughout pregnancy, birth and the postnatal period. So a risk assessment tool helps the midwife and woman to know when a consultation or referral is needed.

Risk assessments can also highlight potential problems that would benefit from early organisation and planning before labour. This might include reviewing the birth plan, reviewing place of birth, engaging other health professionals and putting in place supports so that the woman can cope well after the baby is born.

Risk assessment can also be useful for discussing homebirth with women and their partners. Some women are perfectly suited to homebirth: they’re healthy, their pregnancy is going well and they’re wanting a natural birth. In this case, risk assessment can be used to explain to the woman that she’s safer at home.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Homebirth transfer rates: cause for concern?

What is a woman really asking when she asks her midwife what the midwife’s transfer rate is?

Women often interview several private midwives when they are choosing the right midwife for their needs. Women will ask many questions of their prospective midwife, and one of the more common questions is, “What is your transfer rate?” meaning, “what percentage of the women who book with you for homebirth, end up transferring to hospital?”

On the surface, this seems like a fair question. But what is the woman really asking? I consider that the woman is really asking, “If I book with you, what’s my chance of being transferred?” and when women ask the same question of several midwives, they are most reassured by the midwife with the lowest transfer rate because they perceive that they have the lowest chance of transferring if they go with the midwife with the lowest transfer rate.

Is it a fair assumption to make, that the midwife’s transfer rate, representing her previous client’s outcomes, are a valid guage for the current woman’s likelihood of transfer? Often I find that transfers can’t be predicted at the time a woman books-in for care. If we could predict it, we’d recommend a planned hospital birth. Considering transfer rates from this perspective, a midwife’s transfer rate has no bearing on the current woman sitting with her. As well as this, some transfers occur because the woman has requested it – eg a request for transfer for an epidural, but not on the advice of the midwife as the labour is actually progressing very normally. The other situation that can arise is that the midwife forsees problems occurring and makes some recommendations to avert those problems, but the woman considers the recommendations and declines to follow them. In these cases, again, the midwife’s transfer rate has no bearing on each new client who interviews a midwife.

What’s a “good” homebirth transfer rate?

Well, many might argue that the lowest transfer rate is the best transfer rate. You’re setting out for a homebirth, right? So why go to the midwife with a “high” transfer rate?

I did some scouting around on the internet and found that transfer rates range from 10% through to 50%. The Netherlands has a transfer rate of 52%! This surprised me. In the Netherlands, 86% women start in “primary” care (midwifery care), 28% are transferred in pregnancy and 17% are transferred in labour, leaving 41% women birthing with midwifery care. Of this 41%, 30% occurred at home and 11% occurred in hospital.

The St George hospital homebirth program reported a transfer rate of 37% for its first 100 births and this was in a low-risk clientele (at the start of pregnancy). Their outcomes were excellent, however and the satisfaction of the women and midwives using / working in the service was very high.

Private midwives’ transfer rates vary – anywhere from 10% to 40% in some States of Australia as well as overseas. So there’s a wide fluctuation. What can we deduce from these transfer rates?

Well, with the exception of the Netherlands – which has large numbers – we can’t really deduce very much at all. You never can when you’re dealing with small numbers. Private midwives in Australia typically don’t attend more than 25-30 births a year, and some as few as 5 births a year. One transfer in 5 births is 20%, whereas if that same midwife had attended more births without complication, perhaps the transfer rate would have only been 10%.

There are a couple of things to consider with high and low transfer rates:
1. The risk status of the women at booking
2. The midwife’s adherence to safety and risk management guidelines and her outcomes.

The midwife with the lowest transfer rate might simply have a low transfer rate because she only attends very low risk women: women who have birthed without complication before, who have no health history and who have no problems in their current pregnancy.

The midwife with the high transfer rate might not be transferring willy-nilly, she might just be taking on a higher risk group of women and adopting a wait and see approach – eg, “yes, you have a family history of high blood pressure and you’ve had it with every pregnancy thus far, but let’s try some preventative measures and see what happens this time”, and continue with homebirth plans. If this woman’s blood pressure went up, she would have been transferred, contributing to the midwife’s “high” transfer rate. The low risk / low transfer rate midwife might not have accepted this woman for homebirth at all, hence the difference in transfer rates.

The other thing to consider with transfer rates is the midwife’s commitment to safety and risk management. Some midwives may have low transfer rates because the decision to transfer is prolonged, or because risk factors are denied. Is it good to have a low transfer rate if women or babies have been compromised?

But getting back to the question, “If I book with you, what’s my chance of being transferred?”, this question is impossible to answer.
1. We can’t tell the future. Family history and health history might shine some light on possible issues for the pregnancy, but not necessarily. We can’t predict all the paths a pregnancy can follow.
2. A woman’s determination to move towards – and remain in – a state of health and wellness is a life-long journey that pre-dates the pregnancy.
3. Although midwives will make recommendations with the aim of homebirth in mind, it is the woman’s right to consider the advice and decline it. Declining a midwife’s advice may well mean that a transfer will become necessary.
4. Midwives’ statistics are only relevant to her past clients, not the client sitting with her currently.
5. For many midwives, the goal is really safety: safety for woman and baby. We strive to achieve the safest birth in the setting that can best meet the needs of our client.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Ultrasounds in pregnancy

Pregnancy ultrasounds can be very useful and provide a lot of information. Ultrasounds can be done at various times in the pregnancy to obtain different information about the pregnancy and the baby’s health.

Commonly, ultrasounds are performed at 7 weeks, 12 weeks, 19 weeks, 28 weeks, 34 weeks and at other times if deemed necessary.

During pregnancy, being a special time in a woman’s life, it’s important to ensure that all pregnancy ultrasounds are performed by a practice that specialises in women’s ultrasound. This ensures that your ultrasound images are interpreted by an Obstetrician who specialises in obstetric and gynaecological ultrasound, minimising the chance of errors and the need for repeat scans.

Some obstetricians purchase ultrasound machines and perform ultrasounds at every (or most) pregnancy visits in their private rooms. Please understand that the equipment used and the skill of the obstetrician will vary, and if your obstetrician is scanning you at every visit you would still need to attend an ultrasound clinic for specialised scans.

What can a dating scan show?

An ultrasound can reveal the size of the baby, give an estimated due date, let you know whether you are carrying one baby or twins (or more), establish that the pregnancy is in your uterus and not your fallopian tubes and also show that your baby’s heart is beating.

What would the 12-week scan show?

A 12-week scan is done as part of screening for Downs Syndrome. Most ultrasound practices will combine an ultrasound with blood tests to reveal a woman’s age-related risk along with her actual risk.

A morphology scan is attended at 18-19 weeks. This is a very detailed scan. The purpose of this scan is to detect any obvious physical abnormalities in the baby. The sonographer will spend a lot of time examining all the organs of the baby, and in particular the heart and brain. This is because these are major organs in the baby.

The morphology scan will also show the position of the placenta and where in the placenta the cord is inserted.

Ultrasounds later in pregnancy

Ultrasounds may be performed later in pregnancy for many reasons:

Your midwife or obstetrician is concerned that your baby is not growing well
Your midwife or obstetrician is concerned that there is not enough – or too much – fluid around the baby
You have pre-eclampsia and your care provider wishes to see that your baby is ok
You have had some bleeding
To check on the position of the placenta

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Negative Blood Groups

Everyone has a blood group, or a blood type. The groups are O, A, B and AB. As well as this, a person may or may not contain a protein in their blood called Rhesus factor. A person who has the Rhesus factor is called “Rhesus positive” and a person who does not have this factor is called “Rhesus negative”. So people may be (for example) O positive, A negative, AB positive and so on. About 85% people are Rhesus positive. That is, they contain the Rhesus factor in their blood, so their blood group would be one of the positive ones.

The other 15% of people do not have this factor in their blood. A pregnant woman’s blood group and Rhesus factor are determined by a blood test as part of the tests that are done when a woman first discovers she is pregnant.

If a pregnant woman has a negative blood group and her partner has a positive blood group, there is a chance that the baby will also have a positive blood group. Should any of the baby’s blood get into the mother’s system, her body will make antibodies to the baby’s Rhesus factor. This doesn’t cause any problems in the current pregnancy, but the next time the woman falls pregnant, the antibodies can affect the baby. The baby can be born prematurely, miscarriage is more likely, the baby may be born anaemic and the baby is more likely to experience jaundice.

Fortunately, there is something that can be done to prevent this all from happening!

Women who are a negative blood group will be offered two injections of Anti-D in pregnancy. This prevents any antibodies from forming. After the baby is born, the baby’s blood group will be determined from blood that is in the cord, and if the baby’s blood group is found to be positive, the mother will be given another dose of Anti-D.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Planning a homebirth vs having a homebirth

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Is it just semantics? “I’m having a homebirth” versus, “I’m planning a homebirth”? I often wonder why more women don’t plan homebirths. Planning a homebirth doesn’t rule out hospital as an option if it’s needed or desired. Planning a homebirth keeps all options open and allows women to make the decision about place of birth towards the end of the pregnancy or even in labour.

Sometimes I’m concerned when I hear, “I’m having a homebirth”. The same way I’m concerned if I hear, “I’m having an epidural / induction / waterbirth” or whatever. Yes, these are our plans, but we never really know what’s going to happen until the time.

There is a transfer rate associated with homebirth and this reflects safe practice and respect for women’s decisions. Bearing that in mind, it’s wiser to say, “I’m planning a homebirth” rather than, “I’m having a homebirth”.

Also, consider the reactions from family and friends when they hear these words. When we “plan” a homebirth, friends and family are put at ease. Plans can change if they need to. The common response, “Homebirth?!?! Isn’t that … dangerous??” is no longer needed because plans can change if risks emerge. Sometimes when people hear, “I’m having a homebirth”, they don’t understand that if hospital is needed, we go. The common questions like, “what if you need a caesarean?” “what if you need an epidural?” are valid when we frame it as “having” a homebirth because these interventions are not available at home. But when homebirth is “planned”, those questions are no longer necessary: plans can change.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Birthing in hospital with your own private midwife

Many women prefer to birth their babies in hospital, but they want to have the same midwife all the way through their pregnancy, birth and post-birth period. It’s about building trust, having a familiar face and being understood and supported. During your pregnancy, we explore what birth means to you and discuss your goals for pregnancy and birth, focussing on what’s important to you, what you need, and looking at ways of making the birth as positive and healthy as possible.

I know that no two women are the same, so your care is tailored and individualised to your needs.

Your care

As your private midwife, I provide clinical care, information, advice and emotional support as you journey through your pregnancy and birth. I meet with you regularly in pregnancy so we can learn about each other, and so you can more feel comfortable with me. I help you formulate a birth plan and de-brief previous birth experiences.

When your labour starts, we will be in frequent contact and we will decid whether I should see you at home before heading to hospital, or whether we will meet at the hospital. I will remain your midwife in hospital, caring for you through your labour until your baby is safely born. Early discharge from hospital is encouraged, and we will continue your care at home for 6 weeks.

It’s important to have an understanding of how the general hospital system (public or private) works, to really appreciate why it is so valuable to have your own privat midwife for a hospital birth. Hospital midwives are often busy caring for other women in labour: a hospital-employed midwife often cares for 2-3 labouring women at any given time, while also answering phones, performing administrative roles and so on. When you have your own private midwife with you, she is dedicated to you, and hospital staff are not involved in your care unless invited. This means you have the undivided attention of the midwife you know and trust. Other than your partner and chosen support people, formal birth support is not needed as your private midwife will be right by your side, supporting you all the way.

You benefit from:
- higher chance of normal vaginal birth
- minimal intervention during birth
- professional advice and clinical care
- lowest chance of caesarean
- lowest chance of episiotomy
- lower requirement for pain relief
- higher breastfeeding rates
- lower rates of pregnancy admissions to hospital
- access to midwife means you can change to home birth at any time and have that mifwife as your primary care provider
- midwives can monitor your baby in pregnancy and labour
- midwives can monitor your health in pregnancy and labour
- midwives can liaise with other health professionals if needed

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Gestational Diabetes

Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) is a condition where the body can’t control blood glucose levels effectively because of incorrect insulin production or resistance to the insulin that is present. Or because of excess glucose intake.

GDM is a specific form of diabetes that occurs during pregnancy and usually disappears once the baby is born. Although it is present during pregnancy, if you had diabetes in pregnancy, you are likely to develop it later in life as well. It is most common in women with a family history of Type 2 Diabetes, older or overweight women and some ethnic groups. If you have gestational diabetes for one pregnancy, you are more likely to have it in subsequent pregnancies.

Gestational Diabetes is usually detected by a Glucose Tolerance Test which is attended at 26 weeks of pregnancy. If your care provider feels that you are at high risk for developing gestational diabetes, they may ask to test you earlier than this. You’ll be asked to fast before the test, which is done first thing in the morning. The pathologist will take some blood from you while you are fasting, and then give you a sweet drink. Thereafter, blood tests will be done one hour later and then two hours later. Bring a book to read, as the whole proces can take 2 – 2.5 hours.

Most people manage gestational diabetes through a low GI diet and exercise. Your care provider will work with you and provide you with much information in this. A small percentage of women will require insulin injections. All women with GDM will be asked to monitor their blood glucose levels at certain times during the day. This will indicate whether your diet and exercise program are efeective, or whether you would benefit from Insulin.

GDM usually doesn’t affect the mother, but it can affect the baby. The baby may be larger than normal, and this may translate to problems during birth for you. Such as a longer labour. Your baby’s blood sugar levels will be tested after birth to check for any abnormalities, but this is uncommon.

To reduce your risk of gestational diabetes, keep fit and healthy during your pregnancy with regular pregnancy exercise and a healthy diet. talk with your mdiwife or osbtetrician early on in your pregnancy(once your morning sickness has ceased) and aim for a diet that is low in complex carbohydrates and high in proten, healthy fat and fibrous vegetables.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Has labour become a competition?

Sitting at mother’s groups, listening and observing, a general theme emerges when mothers speak of their recent births: competition. Who had the most traumatic birth? Who had the longest labour? And I came to wonder what purpose this competition serves.

I wonder if it serves a few purposes.

It reinforces birth as a scary, dangerous, even deadly experience that really must occur in hospital. “Thank god I was in hospital. My baby would have died if I had been at home!”

It validates the experience of the woman who had the most traumatic labour. The woman who wins the most-traumatic-birth-competition feels good, as any winner would do. Why would she want to give up this good feeling? After-all, she’s been traumatised by the birth and it feels good to finally have a group of women say, “wow, that was really bad!” rather than, “at least you have a healthy baby”. This reinforcement relieves the woman of her quest to find out what went wrong, and more importantly why, in attempt to avoid the same situation from occurring next time. Hence, “I’ll just go for a ceasar next time” if often heard and the other mothers agree that yes, since this woman’s birth was the most traumatic of all the births in the group, this woman is certainly justified in “going for a caesar” next time.

Other themes that emerge are an avoidance of self-responsibility, empowerment, ownership and belief in birth as a process that a woman’s body can do, if let to labour as nature intends. The most-traumatic-birth-competition rarely centres on the woman’s individual choices and decisions. It focuses on what was done to her and what was out of her control. Have we lost the ability to have the courage of our convictions, to trust our instincts, to believe in ourselves, that we hand over responsibility for our births to a stranger / professional? Often times, the mother who has had the most traumatic birth will have handed over the most responsibility for her birth. This protects the mother from any guilt: one the one hand, it was her care provider’s fault if things didn’t go to plan, and on the other hand, thank goodness she had her careprovider to sort things out and rescue her and her baby from the birth. Either way, the woman bears no responsibility for the outcome that was less-than-desirable.

The mother who had the most natural birth often doesn’t speak. She’s in the minority after all. No-one wants to hear about her amazing home waterbirth. And indeed, if she dares to speak of her positive, empowering experience, she is met with disapproval for daring to speak while Mrs Jones is re-living her nightmare to the group. The natural birth mother is labeled “odd” for ever pursuing a natural birth, and even odder for actually achieving it. She best not speak or her views will only isolate her from the group, and motherhood can be isolating enough. So now the situation is that the competition exists entirely of traumatised mothers, all seeking to be awarded the prize for having had the biggest tear, longest labour, greatest number of interventions and biggest baby. Each wants to feel that although the circumstances were not ideal, there was nothing they could have done to avert such outcomes, that they were mere victims in the unpredictable process of birth. They went to a top private hospital with the best obstetrician in Sydney (funny that they’re all “the best”) and that’s where their responsibility ends.

It’s hard to do the self-reflection and question decisions you made. Maybe you’ll learn that other decisions would have led to better outcomes and this starts the painful cycle of regret for something that cannot be changed. However, it’s ok to honour that journey and know that at the time, we made the best decisions we could have made, but now that we know differently, we will choose differently.

When this happens, maybe the competition will be on different terms. I live for the day when the competition is for the most satisfying, safe and empowering birth experience with the woman coming away with her dignity intact and feeling respected and cared for throughout her experience. It’s totally possible!

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Back Pain in Pregnancy

Many women experience back pain at some point in their pregnancy: sometimes at the start, sometimes at the end … and for a few women, the back pain is there throughout their pregnancy.

There are a number of things that can cause this pain, such as the pregnancy hormones that soften and relax the joints and ligaments, including those in the lower back and pelvis. The purpose of this is to make the pelvis more flexible to allow the baby to be born naturally. This is a common cause of back pain towards the end of pregnancy.

Postural problems can be pre-existing, or can be caused by the growing uterus and baby. If a woman has a history of back pain, this can often mean that she will have problems throughout pregnancy. Chiropractic can help.

Sometimes, towards the end of the pregnancy, the position of the baby can mean that certain nerves (such as the sciatic nerve) are compressed and this can cause various forms of pain such as shooting pain or a dull ache.

There are a number of positive steps you can take to reduce or even eliminate back pain in pregnancy, and the one I have found to be most effecive is chiroptactic care. For short-term relief, Panadol and a hotpack may be helpful.

Exercise is also very helpful as a longer-term measure. I recommend to my patients that they do a minimum of 30 minutes of exercise every day, or most days of the week.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Babies Born At 37-38 Weeks More Likely To Have Health Problems

Link

… babies born just a few weeks premature have worse health outcomes than babies born at full term …

… both babies born at 32-36 weeks … and 37-38 weeks (early term) required hospitalization in the first few months compared to those born at full term (39-41 weeks). In addition, the risk of wheezing and asthma was increased among babies born between 33 and 36 weeks compared to babies born at full term.

The researchers found a strong association between increasing risk of poor health outcomes and decreasing gestation, and that the greatest contribution to disease at age 3 and 5 was being born moderate/ later preterm or early term.

… mothers of early preterm babies were less likely to breast feed for 4+ months compared to women who gave birth after 37 weeks, and were more likely to smoke …

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Pregnancy tipple ‘can harm baby’

In recent years, we seem to have moved from the understanding that no amount of alcohol was safe in pregnancy, to an acceptance that a “small amount” of alcohol was perfectly OK. But how much is a small amount? We now know that no amount of alcohol is safe in pregnancy.

Link

A leading Perth paediatrician is warning doctors against advising pregnant women that it is safe to enjoy an occasional drink, arguing even one glass of wine can harm an unborn’s brain.

[Professor] of paediatrics Desiree Silva said yesterday that she was aware of doctors who reassured women it was “absolutely fine” to have the occasional social drink during pregnancy.

She said the advice was confusing women, who needed to get consistent information reflecting National Health and Medical Research Council guidelines that the safest choice was not to drink at all during pregnancy.

“Health professionals should understand that the level of alcohol in the maternal and foetal circulations is the same, hence just one glass would be one glass too much for the foetal brain,” …

… Dr Silva said she saw many children in her practice with complex behavioural issues including autism and ADHD who had been exposed to alcohol in pregnancy …

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Increased Risk Of Cesarean Section And Other Complications Following Unnecessary Induction Of Labor

Link

A new study … reveals that induction of labor at term in the absence of maternal or fetal indications increases the risk of cesarean section and other postpartum complications for the woman, as well as neonatal complications.

… researchers performed a cohort study utilizing a dataset of 28,626 women with spontaneous onset of labor, induction of labor for recognized indications, and induction of labor for non-recognized indications.

[ie, inductions for no medical reason].

Induction of labor for non-recognized indications was associated with a 67% increased relative risk of cesarean section (compared with spontaneous labor).

It also significantly increased the chance of the infant requiring Neonatal Intensive Care Unit nursery care … when compared with the spontaneous labor onset.

Overall, for the best maternal health outcomes, the lowest risk of requiring epidural or spinal analgesia occurred with birth at or after 41 weeks’ gestation, while the lowest risk of sustaining a severe perineal tear was associated with delivery after 37 weeks’ gestation, and labor complications were at a minimum beyond 38 weeks’ gestation. This indicates that the lowest risk of adverse maternal and infant outcomes occurred with birth between 38 and 39 weeks and with the spontaneous onset of labor.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Hospital says No to cesarean

Link

A NORTH Coast mum who has been told she can’t deliver her baby by cesarean feels [that the] Hospital is prioritising policy over people.

Sylvia … said she was told by an obstetrician at the hospital she could only have a C-section … in an emergency.

“I just had tears streaming down my face – I couldn’t believe it,” …”I feel so powerless and betrayed by the medical system that my choice has been taken away.”

Ms Leveridge, who is 28 weeks pregnant, wants to avoid the 20-hour labour she experienced before undergoing an emergency cesarean to deliver her first child.

Her first baby was a whopping 4.240kg and Ms Leveridge understands this baby will be just as big.

… under the Towards Normal Birth policy, the state is aiming to reduce the cesarean rate to 20% before 2015.

Ms Leveridge said she was advised the hospital has to reduce the number of cesareans it performs in line with the policy.

… there are risks associated with cesarean section operations … the rights of the both babies and mothers have to be balanced out.

“It’s not just the mum’s choice. It’s also the baby’s choice as to how the delivery transpires. This is something that is often lost in the debate about how babies should be delivered,” …

“My problem is I have big babies and I just feel like I’m on the same treadmill,” Ms Leveridge said.

As I see it, there are four issues here:
1. Fear
2. A previous “big” baby
3. A woman’s sense of control over how she will deliver her baby, aka woman-centered care
4. Safety for mother and baby, and the health practitioner’s duty to recommend the safest course of action

Fear
It is not unusual that this woman would feel so fearful of her upcoming birth: her only experience of labour and birth had been an horrendous 20-hour labour with untold interventions delivered in a model of care that provided limited continuity, and ultimately leading to an emergency caesarean. In my practice, women have only one midwife for the whole pregnancy – baby experience. This model of care has been demonstrated to reduce women’s fear, and also promote normal birth. Around 90% women who birth with me experience a normal birth.

A previous “big” baby
A “big” baby is not necessarily a concern, and nor is it necessarily associated with a caesarean. The important factor here is whether the baby was always destined to be a larger baby that is able to fit through an ample pelvis, or whether the baby was abnormally large perhaps because of poor maternal diet or poorly-controlled gestational diabetes. Many “large” babies are born normally: these are often babies who have been nurtured with good nutrition in a woman whose pelvis is amply able to accommodate a larger baby. The labour and birth is often rapid and the baby is born healthily and safely. The same cannot be said of babies who are abnormally large because of high circulating glucose in the mother’s blood. In my practice, much time is spent with women talking about nutrition; why it is important; motivational tools to remain healthy and fit in pregnancy; and finally assisting them with a healthy eating plan that is flexible and is based on their own unique tastes and needs. The average birth weight is around 3.4Kg.

A woman’s sense of control over how she will deliver her baby, aka woman-centered care

We know from studies that a request for a caesarean is based mostly on a woman’s fear of labour. The woman in this article was quite justified in her fear: her only personal knowledge of birth was an awful labour culminating in a caesarean, and she sees herself staring down that same barrel, since she again feels that she has a big baby. I often find that women will make an initial request, for example for a hospital birth or an epidural, and through their pregnancy care experience, they grow massively in terms of their confidence, knowledge and trust, such that they are saying later in pregnancy, “Actually, maybe I can do this without an epidural. Maybe if I can labour and birth in the water, that will help and I won’t need an epidural.” Or, “I know I’ve been wanting a hospital birth all along, but I’m curious about homebirth and if all’s well, I think I might like to stay home in labour.” The power of continuity of care – where every woman has only one midwife as her midwifery care provider – is often understated in the literature.

Safety for mother and baby, and the health practitioner’s duty to recommend the safest course of action

I’ve sometimes been heard to say that as midwives, we really only have one job, and that is safety. Women engage midwives for their care because they understand that midwives have a unique skill-set that includes knowledge, experience, judgment and compassion. If women possessed this skill-set, they would have no need for midwives. It is the health practitioner’s role to recommend the safest course of action, which in this case is a VBAC. The woman is so caught up in fear from a traumatic previous experience that rationally, she is probably not even able to take any of this in. The woman should be supported, not necessarily to birth vaginally or abdominally, but just supported. Nothing more, nothing less. After working one-on-one with her private midwife, towards the end of her pregnancy, and with a healthily-grown baby, she just might see things differently and agree that a VBAC is the safest course of action for her and also for her baby. To thrust this (VBAC) upon a woman who is driven by an unresolved and justified fear state is unreasonable and shows a lack of compassion. Yes, a VBAC is probably the safest for mother and baby. But fear (and the absence of fear: confidence, calmness, surrender) is the most important driver of birth. Until we work to eliminate fear and instill confidence, we will have high caesarean rates, whether these are chosen by women or recommended by health practitioners.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Gestational diabetes to soar

Link

One in five pregnant women could be diagnosed with gestational diabetes under new criteria …

The number of women with gestational diabetes could increase 50 per cent under guidelines that will call for universal screening of pregnant women and lower the blood glucose level deemed for a positive diagnosis.

The Australasian Diabetes in Pregnancy Society has taken a year and a half preparing to adopt the international criteria, in part because of a fear the health system would be unable to cope.

… In the past, the level of blood glucose needed to qualify a woman as needing treatment for blood glucose was based on her risk of developing diabetes later in life.

But increasing research showing risks to the baby has led to a reassessment of the levels, which will decrease from 5.5mmol/L to 5.1mmol/L …

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Popular fetal monitoring method leads to more c-sections

Link

This is not new news; we have known for some time that electronic fetal monitoring leads to more caesareans. This article confirms what we know. In my practice, women do not have routine electronic fetal monitoring in labour. I listen to the baby with a hand-held, water-proof doppler and this is an unobtrusive method that can be used while the woman is in the bath or shower or in any position.

Pregnant women in labor, upon arriving at the hospital, will often have their baby’s heart rate monitored to assess the baby’s wellbeing. A new research review suggests that the use of one popular method of monitoring does not improve maternal and fetal outcomes and makes women more likely to have cesarean sections …

The new review … looked at how each type of monitoring affected women admitted to the hospital in labor with low-risk pregnancies and found there was no benefit of using the CTG at admission. However, women who had an admission CTG were about 20 percent more likely to have a caesarean section compared to those monitored by intermittent auscultation.

… about 79 percent of maternity wards in the United Kingdom, 96 percent in Ireland and all of the labor units in Sweden employ an admission CTG.

The review included four studies of more than 13,000 women randomized to receive either CTG or intermittent auscultation upon their admission with signs of labor.

“Our findings support recommendations from professional bodies in some countries that state the admission CTG not be used for low-risk women,” …

… “We now know that this form of monitoring has not improved clinical outcomes,” he explained. “Instead, because of its inherent limitations, this form of monitoring leads to many ‘false alarms’ that are resolved by performing cesarean delivery.”

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Weight gain in pregnancy ‘risk factor for GDM in patients who were already obese’

Link

Weight gain in pregnancy is a significant risk factor for developing gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) in women who are already overweight, but not in those whose body mass index (BMI) was low or normal before conception …

… mothers-to-be who develop the complication put on more weight in the first 24 weeks of pregnancy than people whose glucose levels remain normal.

Good nutrition and lifestyle habits are really important for a healthy pregnancy, birth and baby. A preconception appointment with a midwife or obstetrician can help point women in the right direction to maximise health and well-being prior to pregnancy.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Cesarean Delivery May Not Be More Protective For Small, Premature Newborns

Link

…delivery by cesarean section may not be protective compared to vaginal deliveries for babies who are small for their gestational age … born more than six weeks before their due date.

“We found that infants delivered vaginally were not at a significantly increased risk for any neonatal complications. In fact, infants delivered by cesarean had significantly higher odds of breathing problems after birth,” … “This indicates that cesarean isn’t superior to vaginal deliveries for this high risk population.”…

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Inducing Labor Better for Big Babies

Link

The study below has made a compelling argument for induction for babies who are thought to be large for their gestational age. The first thing to ascertain before deciding on a course of action, is that the baby is truly larger than expected. All methods of judging a baby’s size in the uterus are prone to error, for example ultrasound has a 15% margin of error. Therefore we need to take this into account when we are advising women of the safest options. Many inductions (and even caesareans) are performed for “big” babies, only to have the induction go pear-shaped and lead to a caesarean … for a 3.5Kg baby. On the other hand, an earlier induction for a genuinely large baby may well prevent a caesarean, forceps birth, perineal trauma (tears, episiotomy) and so on.

Large-for-date babies are more likely to experience neonatal trauma if nature is allowed to take its course than if labor is induced …

Among fetuses estimated sonographically to be above the 95th percentile for weight, adverse events such as shoulder dystocia were three times less likely if labor was induced …

Induction of labor also was associated with a greater likelihood of spontaneous vaginal delivery …

Previous observational studies have suggested that induction of labor may lower birth weight and decrease the chance for neonatal injury such as shoulder dystocia, brachial plexus injury, and death.

However, studies also found increased rates of cesarean section with induction, and the reliability of fetal weight estimation has been questioned.

… 817 women … were assigned to be induced within three days of enrollment or to expectant management.

They averaged 37 weeks gestation, and fetal weight was estimated at an average of 3,700 grams.

The difference between the groups was approximately nine days additional gestation in the expectant management group along with a 287-g (10 oz.) higher birth weight.

In the expectant management group, 6.6% of neonates experienced shoulder dystocia, compared with 2.2% in the induced group …

Also significant was the difference in vaginal deliveries, which occurred in 58.7% of the induced births and 51.7% of expectant births.

Cesarean section was needed in 28% of the induction group and 31.7% of the expectant group.

Secondary outcomes — including clavicular fracture and brachial plexus injury — were similar between the two groups.

There were no serious or permanent brachial plexus injuries or deaths.

… The study demonstrated that prevention of macrosomia at birth can lead to safe birth outcomes …

The other aspect that has not been mentioned in this study is the importance of caring for women and providing advice that will help them to grow a baby who is appropriate for their pelvis, to maximise the chance of a normal birth. This is an essential aspect of the care that I provide to women.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Anaemia in pregnancy

Anaemia is a physiological (healthy) adaptation to pregnancy and is caused by the dilution of your blood. If you – or your midwife – are concerned by anaemia, consider dietary changes – eat food rich in iron (dark green leafy vegetables, red meat, whole grains, dried fruit, parsley, watercress). Avoid tea and coffee.

Supplements – make sure these contain iron and Vitamin C. Some brands can cause constipation. In this case, try Floradix (a liquid form) or FAB Co (tablet form) or Spatone. Herbal supplements include nettle, peppermint, blackcurrant and parsley tea. If anaemia is severe, your midwife may ask to do additional blood tests to determine the cause of anaemia.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

“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 learn more about my services.

Natural Twin Birth

I had a difficult delivery with my first baby, including posterior presentation, premature rupture of membranes, meconium staining, stalled labour, 18 hours of Syntocinon, a largely ineffectual epidural, a 4 hour second stage, and forceps delivery. My daughter had severe respiratory distress and was in the NICU for several days. It was a very tough introduction to parenthood and left me quite traumatised, especially the separation from my daughter. My husband and I decided that we would try for a homebirth if we had another baby, in the hope that a calmer environment would assist the birth process. When I fell pregnant again, we found a lovely homebirth midwife.

I started to show really early. At 8 weeks I was in maternity wear. I thought it was just because it was a second pregnancy, but a 9 week ultrasound showed TWO BABIES. We were completely shocked as there are no twins in my family. Twins of course meant that a homebirth was out of the question.

There followed many long months of argument with various obstetricians about our birth choices. We wanted as little intervention as possible. A standard twin delivery involves syntocinon (which I was very afraid of, after the previous experience), continuous monitoring (which I had hated with my first birth, as I felt chained to the bed) and an epidural prior to the second stage, in case positioning/version or a c-section is necessary to deliver the second twin. In my first birth, the epidural meant I had no pushing urge and seriously compromised my ability to deliver my daughter, hence the very prolonged second stage, so I did not want an epidural this time around, although I was prepared for Synto to be administered between the twins if labour did not re-establish. The hospital also wanted both twins delivered on the bed, which I did not agree with as I had found pushing in that position impossible the first time around. Our views were very challenging to the obstetricians and some were quite aggressive about it, although I must say the head OB was more reasonable and was prepared to admit that my refusal to consent to an epidural would be a “complete contraindication” to giving me one! Throughout this stage our midwife was a pillar of strength and information. She gave us the courage of our convictions and more than once came to the hospital to talk with the obstetricians on our behalf. Even so, the hospital was very unhappy with our birth preferences. It was a stressful time, helped somewhat by a Calmbirth ® course.

In the end all our arguments ended up being moot. At 33 weeks, I started to feel an ominous itching all over. Tests showed elevated bile salts and poor liver function results. I had obstetric cholestasis. Our midwife and the hospital agreed: the babies would need to be delivered by 37 weeks. And I knew that that early, an induction would almost certainly involve Syntocinon.

This was really difficult for me to accept. I was terribly afraid of the drug, and knew that Synto would mean continuous monitoring and therefore limit my movement, which I also feared. However, I knew that my fear would make the delivery more difficult and the pain worse. At this point the hospital dropped the bombshell that despite all their delivery rooms having deep birthing baths, I would not be allowed to use those or the shower if I had to have Synto, as they believe this risks pump damage to the Synto pump. Essentially this meant I was walking into a labour that was likely to be more painful, with less pain relief options. It was going to be down to Calmbirth ® alone, if I wanted to avoid drugs (and I did!).

I did a lot of Calmbirth ® practice from then on. But the Calmbirth ® visualisation exercises presupposed a normal delivery without intervention, and I found it very upsetting to listen to them. I hit on the idea of doing my own visualisations, of a medicalised induction process. After a few of these I was able to work through some of my fears.

On the day of the induction, we kissed our daughter goodbye at 5am and met our midwife at the hospital. Preliminary checks showed a Bishop score of 5, very promising for 36 weeks. The hospital midwife applied prostaglandin gel and sent us out to freedom. We had a lovely breakfast. I started to have sporadic contractions but nothing serious. We returned to the hospital 6 hours later. My cervix had ripened to 2cm, and the very cheerful OB was able to break the waters for twin 1 (our second daughter) at 3.45pm. No meconium staining! I dared to ask the OB how she was presenting. ANTERIOR, WOOHOO! I was very pleased with that.

Contractions came rather more strongly after that point, but were still sporadic. The felt very “knifey”, and our midwife explained this was from the prostaglandin gel. We held off on the Synto as long as possible, but at 6.25pm the drip was put up and contractions started in earnest. Continuous monitoring was in place, but via telemetry so I could have moved. Ironically, though, I didn’t feel the need to. I went deep into calm breathing and spent most of the labour sitting beside the bed on a fit ball, sometimes circling my hips but more often just breathing to ride the contractions with my husband stroking my back. Unlike my first labour, I had no real idea of when the next contraction was coming, and ended up doing my calm breathing (in for 4, out for 6) solidly for hours. I wasn’t afraid of the contractions. I could really feel them doing their work, and little twin 1 moving firm and fast down. I was determined to “get out of the way” of labour and with each contraction focused on opening up and not clenching against the pain. Our midwife was convinced things were going quickly and asked us when we thought we would be having the babies. I told her anything before midnight was a sucker bet! She said 11pm.

At 8.30pm, about 2 hours after I started having regular contractions, the pain was starting to get BIG. The OB did a cervix check – I was 5cm. I was very disheartened by this, but our midwife told me that the first 5cm was the hardest, and the very encouraging OB tried to convince me that it wasn’t all about centimetres and that my cervix felt promisingly thin and stretchy. In hindsight, even in my first labour I dilated from 5 to 10cm in under an hour, so I should have known what was coming – but I didn’t!

Throughout this time I was not making any noise. The hospital’s midwife didn’t seem to think I was in established labour, and threatened to up the Synto dose to make the contractions “strong and regular”, even though they were already sufficient to dilate my cervix 3cm in under 2 hours. I managed to insist “no. more. Synto!” She reserved judgement, but it might have been the adrenaline kick I needed, as by 9.15pm I was having enormous contractions every 2-3 minutes. I could feel them as a giant swelling band of pain stretching around my whole belly and stretching lower. At this point I started vocalising “ah, ah, ah” throughout contractions, to help me ride the pain and stop me clenching down. I remember saying “if this isn’t transition, I’m in trouble!” I didn’t believe it could be transition, though – not so early, not when my first birth had taken almost 3 days. Our midwife said she thought we would have babies by 10pm, and I didn’t believe her.

I needed to get off the fit ball and change position, and asked if I could get on all fours, although the idea of moving seemed impossible to imagine. The hospital midwife set up a crash mat and a nice beanbag for me to lean on. I leaned forward and within one contraction of moving had started making some amazing noises. Unlike my “ah ah ahs” they were completely involuntary. And then I could feel twin 1 crowning. I did not believe it had happened so quickly, and cried out “what’s happening?” Everyone still makes fun of me for this. She was born in only a couple of pushes at 9.25pm, and our midwife had to tell the hospital midwife to put her gloves on to catch her. Our beautiful daughter, with a lovely round head, pink skin and a great big yell! There is a photo of me still on all fours, with a blissed-out grin. I could not believe how easy and quick it had been. I got to hold her straight away, but contractions started up again quite quickly, and she went to her daddy for some skin to skin time.

At this point the obstetricians arrived – a registrar and resident. I wanted to stay on the floor, but the registrar managed to persuade me up on the bed to check twin 2′s position, as we knew he was breech. Contractions started up again within minutes and were really agonising now, as I had lost my Calmbirth focus and as the position (twin 2′s spine to mine) had that sort of posterior feeling to it. But within seconds I was again feeling the inexorable urge to push. The OB flicked twin 2′s feet out as he was in a squatting position, the midwife and OB flexed twin 2′s head by pushing on my stomach and with a few mighty pushes he was out too, at 9.39pm. Our son! He was handed to me but unlike J, had a bit of trouble breathing, and spent some time in the special care nursery. He was back to us almost before we knew it. I must say he had a very breech-looking head, which looked like a mighty frown, but he’s ever so handsome and cheerful now.

J weighed in at 2.98kg (I was really ticked off she could not stretch to the extra 20gm), and P weighed 3.06kg, excellent weights for 36 weekers, let alone twins!

After twin 2 was out, I lost all patience for the pain – rather a pity as the Synto kept getting ramped up to deliver the placentas and then to deal with my uterus which did not want to shrink back down. I ended up with a Synto drip all night. I tell people this birth was meant to help me deal with my fear of Synto once and for all.

Both babies had beautiful breastfeeds within an hour or two of birth, which sadly was not an omen of things to come for twin 1, but it was lovely.


Anyway, that was our birth. Twins born without any pain relief (not even hot water) or really any intervention other than the induction drugs, with 4 hours of contractions total and only about 2 of those active labour. It wasn’t the birth I had wanted but it was a wonderful experience and very healing after my first daughter’s birth. I am so proud of myself, and look back on the birth with amazed gratitude all the time.

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.

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.

Delivering better maternity care

Link

Despite countless inquiries, initiatives and ministerial pledges … maternity care remains one of the NHS’s problem areas …

In recent weeks there have been two significant pieces of evidence published that will help shape practice affecting the UK’s 800,000 births a year. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) produced new guidelines for the NHS in England and Wales on the circumstances in which mothers-to-be should be able to have a Caesarean-section delivery.

Meanwhile the landmark Birthplace study … sought to clarify the relative risks of having a baby at home, in hospital or in a birth centre run by midwives; the study found all settings carried a low level of risk. Both documents aim to advise maternity teams on how to give mothers and their babies the best possible experience.

… It is no wonder maternity services are under pressure … England has had a 22% increase in births over the past decade …

But the maternity workforce is not just short of midwives, the roundtable heard. Of those 800,000 annual births, 94% of them take place in hospitals where doctors are present along with midwives; the others, at home (2%) and in birth centres (4%), have midwives solely in charge. But the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) believes the 2,186 senior doctors working as consultants in that area of medicine is too few. It wants the NHS to boost numbers to 3,000-3,300.

Mothers-to-be would benefit because every hospital maternity unit would have a consultant on hand 24/7 and less experienced doctors would no longer be in charge overnight and at weekends …

… “the current system of maternity care is unsustainable. You have to reconfigure”. The participant meant that some maternity units should be closed – merged, in effect – so fewer, larger childbirth centres could offer mothers a better service, partly thanks to more specialist staff handling a greater number of deliveries concentrated in the same place.

It makes little sense for large urban areas to have separate maternity units just a few miles apart, a view confirmed for the speaker by seeing that sort of setup on a recent visit to Leeds and nearby towns.

Many health professionals support the concept of reorganisation. And the reconfiguration of neonatal care services in 2003, which led to fewer units dealing with sick babies but offering enhanced care, is a potential model to follow, another participant added. But there is a major obstacle to overcome first: … To close your core maternity service is a death trap as an MP. So that will not happen,” …

… simply creating fewer, but larger, hospital units is not the answer and there needs to be more midwife-led birth centres, either standalone units or situated beside hospitals, in case a mother needs urgent medical attention …

There was also a strong consensus that the huge proportion of births occurring in hospitals, 94%, is too high. While there was support for moving towards an equal split – 33% at home, 33% in birth centres and 33% in hospital – there was also a recognition that politics, entrenched attitudes and the tightest NHS budget in a generation means that will probably remain just an aspiration for the foreseeable future.

… In 2007, Maternity Matters promised women in England a choice of birth place, but the reality is that many still do not get that. One participant working on the NHS frontline said pressure on maternity services was so great in some places that midwives who usually help women to have home births are having to work, instead, on labour wards, thus depriving those seeking a home birth of that supposedly guaranteed right.

Similarly, surveys by the Healthcare Commission and its successor as the NHS regulator for England, the Care Quality Commission, have shown the promise to women of one-to-one care from a midwife during their labour is also not honoured for as many as a quarter of mothers-to-be, who are left alone and find it stressful …

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Myths and Truths of Obesity and Pregnancy

Link

Ironically, despite excessive caloric intake, many obese women are deficient in vitamins vital to a healthy pregnancy …

… Many obese women are vitamin deficient …

Forty percent are deficient in iron, 24 percent in folic acid and 4 percent in B12. This is a concern because certain vitamins, like folic acid, are very important before conception, lowering the risk of cardiac problems and spinal defects in newborns. Other vitamins, such as calcium and iron, are needed throughout pregnancy to help babies grow.

… vitamin deficiency has to do with the quality of the diet, not the quantity. Obese women tend to stray away from fortified cereals, fruits and vegetables, and eat more processed foods that are high in calories but low in nutritional value.

“Just like everybody else, women considering pregnancy or currently pregnant should get a healthy mix of fruits and vegetables, lean proteins and good quality carbohydrates. Unfortunately, these are not the foods people lean towards when they overeat,” noted Thornburg. “Women also need to be sure they are taking vitamins containing folic acid before and during pregnancy.”

… In 2009, the Institute of Medicine revised its recommendations for gestational weight gain for obese women from “at least 15 pounds” to “11-20 pounds.” According to past research, obese women with excessive weight gain during pregnancy have a very high risk of complications, including indicated preterm birth, cesarean delivery, failed labor induction, large-for-gestational-age infants and infants with low blood sugar.

If a woman starts her pregnancy overweight or obese, not gaining a lot of weight can actually improve the likelihood of a healthy pregnancy …

… Obese women have increased rates of respiratory complications, and up to 30 percent experience an exacerbation of their asthma during pregnancy, a risk almost one-and-a-half times more than non-obese women.

… Breastfeeding rates are poor among obese women, with only 80 percent initiating and less than 50 percent continuing beyond six months, even though it is associated with less postpartum weight retention and should be encouraged as it benefits the health of mom and baby.

… it can be challenging for obese women to breast feed. It often takes longer for their milk to come in and they can have lower production …

Preconception care and a healthy eating and exercise program before pregnancy, that is maintained during pregnancy, can be helpful.

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.

Baby’s Weight Affected By Mothers’ Weight Before And During Pregnancy

Link

A new study … reveals that both pre-pregnant weight (body mass index, BMI) and weight gain in pregnancy are important predictors of babies’ birthweight. This is important since high birthweight may also predict adult overweight.

… Results of the study showed that birthweight of the newborn child increased with increasing maternal pre-pregnant BMI, and that offspring birthweight also increased with increasing weight gain of the mother during pregnancy.

Every increase in one kg of pre-pregnancy BMI increased birthweight with 22.4 g. A subsequent increase in weight gain during pregnancy of 10 kg increased birthweight with 224 g.

… “Encouraging women to attain a healthy weight before conception and keep a moderate weight gain during pregnancy is important to avoid high or excessive birthweight in offspring,” …

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Older mums in new age of parenting

Link

Almost a quarter of first-time Australian mothers are giving birth after the age of 35 … almost 6 per cent higher than the figure in 2000 …

… the number of mothers in the older age bracket would continue to grow for a range of reasons including lifestyle, economic factors and career choices.

“There’s a really strong tendency for women these days to get established in their careers or job and working for a period of time for their own self-fulfilment but also because of the economic circumstances,” …

… women now tended to have children over a shorter period – leaving less time between births – because they were older.

… the average maternal age in 2009 was 30, compared with 29 a decade earlier …

… older women faced a greater risk of complications during pregnancy including miscarriage, high blood pressure and diabetes …

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.

Stress In Early Pregnancy Can Lead To Shorter Pregnancies, More Pre-term Births And Fewer Baby Boys

Link

Stress in the second and third months of pregnancy can shorten pregnancies, increase the risk of pre-term births and may affect the ratio of boys to girls being born …

… women who experienced a severe quake … during their second and third months of pregnancy had shorter pregnancies and were at higher risk of delivering pre-term (before 37 weeks gestation). The pregnancies of women exposed to the earthquake in the second month of pregnancy were on average 0.17 weeks (1.3 days) shorter than those in the unaffected areas of Chile. The pregnancies of those exposed in the third month were 0.27 weeks (1.9 days) shorter. Normally, about six in 100 women had a pre-term birth, but among women exposed to the earthquake in the third month of pregnancy, this rose by 3.4%, meaning more than nine women in 100 delivered their babies early.

The effect was most pronounced for female births; the probability of pre-term birth increased by 3.8% if exposure to the quake occurred in the third month, and 3.9% if it occurred in the second month. In contrast there was no statistically significant effect seen in male births.

As the stress of the earthquake had greater effect on pre-term births in girls rather than boys, the researchers had to make adjustments for this when calculating the effect of stress on the sex ratio: the ratio of male to female live births. They found that there was a decline in the sex ratio among those exposed to the earthquake in the third month of gestation of 5.8%.

… “Generally, there are more male than female live births. The ratio of male to female births is approximately 51:49 … Our findings indicate a 5.8% decline in this proportion, which would translate into a ratio of 45 male births per 100 births, so that there are now more female than male births …

Previous research has suggested that in times of stress women are more likely to miscarry male foetuses because they grow larger than females and therefore require greater investment of resources by the mother; they may also be less robust than females and may not adapt their development to a stressful environment in the womb. “Our findings on a decreased sex ratio support this hypothesis and suggest that stress may affect the viability of male births,” … “In contrast, among female conceptions, stress exposure appears not to affect the viability of the conception but rather, the length of gestation.”

… possible mechanisms to explain their findings could involve the placenta, which sets the duration of the pregnancy, and the effect of the stress hormone cortisol on the placenta’s function …

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.

Simulator to predict chance of caesarean?

Link

Traditionally, doctors and midwives have used a technique called pelvimetry to measure the pelvis and try to determine its adequacy for giving birth. But pelvic size is just one factor in how smoothly labor will go, rendering the method largely insufficient.

Scientists in France have been working to take some of the guesswork out of labor predictions … their newly developed software, called Predibirth, predicts birth outcomes quite accurately.

The researchers used their software to process magnetic resonance images of 24 pregnant women, capturing the pelvis and fetus, and then simulating 72 possible trajectories the baby’s head might take through the birth canal. The program then uses this data to score the mother’s chances of having a normal (vaginal) birth.

… Of the 24 women in the study, the 13 who delivered normally all had highly favorable birth outcome scores. Three women who had high-risk scores underwent elective C-sections. Of the five women who underwent emergency C-section, the three with obstructed labor had high-risk scores, and the two who experienced heart rhythm abnormalities had mildly favorable or favorable scores.

More accurate measurements of labor risks might not only keep C-section rates lower and help identify necessary C-sections before they become emergencies, but these measurements could also better inform those who want to deliver at home whether it is safe to do so.

I wonder if all of those women had undergone extensive preparation for birth and had sought continuity of midwifery care? Of 24 women, only 13 delivered vaginally. That is only 54%! Private midwifery care generally had rates of normal birth up around 90%.

Visit my website to learn more about my services.

Caesarean link to respiratory infections in babies

Link

A new study from Perth has found that babies born by elective caesarean are more likely to be admitted to hospital with a serious respiratory infection, bronchiolitis, in the first year of life.

This was a ten-year study that analysed the birth data of over 212,000 babies.

Bronchiolitis is generally caused by respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), and is one of the most common reasons for babies to be admitted to hospital. Bronchiolitis also has been shown to be associated with an increased risk of asthma in children, and it is known that babies born by elective caesarean experience more asthma than babies who were born vaginally or born by caesarean after labour had commenced.

Previous research found an increased risk of hospital admissions for respiratory infections in children less than 2 years of age, delivered by elective caesarean.

It is thought that labour stimulates the baby’s immune system and strengthens it. babies who are born by elective caesarean do not experience labour, and therefore their immune systems are not primed in the same way.

Visit my website to explore birthing services.

New study on risk factors for gestational diabetes

Link

… One type of diabetes, gestational diabetes (GDM), is first diagnosed during pregnancy. It can cause complications to the mother and fetus during pregnancy and can develop into type 2 diabetes following pregnancy. A new study … reported that age and body mass index (BMI) are significant risk factors in whether a woman will develop GDM. Furthermore, those factors are particularly relevant in Black African and South Asian women. Early detection is essential for the effective treatment of GDM. Known risk factors include BMI, advanced maternal age, previous GDM, delivery of a large infant, family history of diabetes, and race. … despite knowledge of these risk factors, few studies have looked at how they interact to influence GDM risk; therefore, they conducted a retrospective study of associations between GDM and maternal age, BMI, and race, as well as how the factors interact with one another. The study compared 1,688 women who developed GDM between 1988 and 2000 with 172,632 women who did not …

… The researchers found an association between greater maternal age and risk of GDM and between increasing BMI and risk of GDM; however, the effects varied greatly between women of different races. The baseline comparison group was white Europeans aged 20 to 24 years. White European women aged 30 to 34 years had twice the risk of developing GDM; furthermore, those 40 years of age and older had a four-fold increase in risk. Increasing age was associated with a much larger increase in risk among black African women. Compared to baseline women, those aged 25 to 29 years had 3.40 times greater risk, those aged 35 to 39 years had a 13.67 times greater risk, and those aged 40 years and older had a 59.20 times greater risk of developing GDM.

Compared with white Europeans with normal BMIs, black Africans and South Asians were more likely to develop GDM regardless of BMI. The authors concluded: “Advancing maternal age and BMI are more important risk factors for GDM in South Asian and Black African women than in White European or Black Caribbean women.”

This study contributes valuable information for the detection of gestational diabetes. Much work has been done in this area on the past two years and testing recommendations are in the process of being changed.

Visit my website to explore birthing services.

Evolution Offers Clues to Leading Cause of Death During Childbirth

Link

Unusual features of the human placenta may be the underlying cause of postpartum hemorrhage …

… postpartum hemorrhage accounts for nearly 35 percent … of the 358,000 worldwide annual maternal deaths during childbirth.

Despite its prevalence, the causes of postpartum hemorrhage are unknown … While common in humans, postpartum hemorrhage is rare in other mammals …

… Previous studies on postpartum hemorrhage have focused on how it can be treated and on recognizing its associated risk factors …

In humans, the invasiveness of the placenta into the uterine wall and the subsequent takeover of maternal blood vessels appear to be greater than in nonhumans … This suggests a link between placental invasiveness early in pregnancy and blood loss at delivery, when the placenta separates from the uterine wall.

Research by Abrams and Rutherford suggests that hormones produced by trophoblasts — cells formed during the first stage of pregnancy that provide nutrients to the embryo and develop into a large part of the placenta, and that guide the interaction with the uterus — may provide an early predictor of risk.

“Biomarkers of postpartum hemorrhage that could be used early in pregnancy would allow women to make informed decisions about their choice of birthing site and medical care based on their risk,” Abrams said. This biomarker hypothesis has not yet been studied.

… In a normal birth, the placenta begins to separate from the uterine wall before delivery. Bleeding at the site is normally stopped by the constriction of blood vessels due to the contraction and retraction of uterine muscles …

There are two major risk factors for postpartum hemorrhage … The leading factor is uterine contractions that are too weak to stop bleeding. The cause of this is unclear …

Visit my website to explore birthing services.

Caesarean link to infant respiratory infections

Link

Babies born by elective caesareans are more likely to suffer a serious respiratory infection in their first year of life …

The decade-long study into the incidence of Bronchiolitis found that babies born by elective caesarean were 11 per cent more likely to be hospitalised with the infection than babies delivered by other means.

Researchers at Perth’s Telethon Institute for Child Health Research analysed birth data and hospital records for 212,068 babies over a 10-year period in WA for the study …

… while the increase was relatively modest, it highlighted the risk to a child’s immune system when elective caesareans were the chosen birth method.

“We compared elective caesareans with other modes of delivery because with elective caesareans we could be confident that labour had not begun and therefore the baby would not have been exposed to [natural] chemicals that are released during the labour process,” Dr Moore said.

“It is increasingly plausible that delivery without labour could impair a newborn’s immune system and may also explain the known link between c-sections and an increased risk of asthma.”

… Bronchiolitis is generally caused by the common respiratory synctial virus and is one of the most common reasons for babies to be admitted to hospital.

She said that while most children recover from the infection quickly, it can make the child more prone to other respiratory illnesses such as asthma later in life.

… the research … pointed to the need for more research into the suspected role of various chemicals that are produced by mothers during labour in priming a newborn’s immune system.

“Given that caesarean rates are rising in Australia, this potential impact on the immune system might be another factor that parents and doctors may consider if choosing a caesarean for other than medical reasons,” she said.

“As it’s the first time we have reported such an association, it’s really important that the message get out there that women and their clinicians need to consider this when opting for a caesarean.”

Visit my website to explore birthing services.

Turbulent times

A lot has been happening in the world of homebirth and midwifery. Many will have read the articles about homebirth, freebirth, midwives and maternity care that are appearing in our papers on a daily basis.

I have not posted for a couple of weeks now, for three main reasons: one I have been really busy with my practice which has not been this busy for about two years. Second, I attended the Australian College of Midwives National Conference – the ACM worked really hard to deliver an excellent conference that was appreciated by all. I had the fantastic opportunity to meet midwives from around Australia and share ideas, discuss practice and talk birthy things. I was pleased that the conference was in Sydney, because as those of you who know me will know, in my non-midwifery life I rescue and care for injured and orphaned native birds, and so I was able to make a trip home most days of the conference to feed everyone at home. They were hungry but they all survived! I digress. The third reason for not posting was that the recent issues have made me re-assess things like responsibility, accountability, safety, choice, control, autonomy, beneficence, informed decision-making and many other issues. I have no answers to report. Just lots of reflection.

Midwifery and maternity care are going through turbulent times and as professionals and organisations, I feel that we have done a major disservice to women that they feel safer birthing at home – with or without a registered midwife – in the presence of risk factors – because they so strongly believe that the hospital system will not enable them to birth in the manner of their choosing. It is a sad reflection on the health system and the professionals who work within it. Women who cannot access midwifery care because they are planning a VBAC. Women who are told that if they insist on birthing vaginally with twins, they must accept continuous monitoring, induction, epidural and birth in stirrups for twin two. Women whose only option is to birth in a hospital that is two hours from their home. We have all heard the stories.

My biggest disappointment is the lack of midwife admitting rights. We are one year into the maternity reforms on November 1 this year. We have eligible midwives with Medicare provider numbers, ordering tests and working with doctors to provide safe care to women and babies – yet we cannot access hospitals to provide this care. I well understand that there are a lot of hurdles to be overcome with midwife admitting rights, and life has taught me that nothing in life is impossible.

The release of the homebirth position statement – which I fully support as an evidence-based and safe way to provide care – combined with the lack of midwife admitting rights, is disastrous for women and midwives. Higher risk women are forced into a position of birthing in hospital without their midwife if the midwife complies with the position statement but has no admitting rights – otr else freebirthing, potentially with disastrous consequences. Overnight, this change occurred and women are fuming.

It is impossible to believe, but an eligible midwife who crosses all the “T”s and dots all the “I”s will suffer incredibly in terms of restriction of clientele, however if she were to remove her name from the register – something that I understand is very easy to do – she may do just as she pleases with no accountability, regulation or practice standards. Midwives are placed in the untenable situation of a dwindling practice, or unregistering and having a flourishing practice. Until admitting rights are in place, midwives will have no place to birth with their higher-risk clients. This situation does not see the Government supporting midwives or women. It is creating a disaster.

The various politics of homebirth and midwifery has created an enormous rift between midwives. It seems that there are the bunch who have elected to become eligible, forge ahead with collaborative arrangements, push for admitting rights and accept the increased regulation that is upon us as our profession matures. The other group opposes the increased regulation and restriction of choice, supports midwife- (or non-midwife)-attended homebirth for any woman who wants it and really wants things to just go back to how they used to be, before insurance became mandatory. Many midwives sit comfortable in the middle of this debate. It is sad to watch such division and animosity amongst midwives. We seem to lack a capacity of saying, “We don’t share each other’s vision and we have made different choices, but we are midwives and we will support each other”. As one midwife said to me, “We are each doing the best we can for the women we care for and we’re making the best of a rotten situation”.

I know 2012 will be better than 2011. Who knows? Maybe it’ll be an historic year where for the very first time, women will birth on their own terms, with their chosen midwife, at home or in hospital. I wonder how many women will insist on homebirth in spite of significant risks, if they are able to birth in hospital with their own midwife and in the manner of their choosing.

Visit my website to explore birthing services.

Private midwife at public hospital

Our local newspaper wrote an article about the model of care I am able to offer women:

THE owner of Essential Birth Consulting at Bexley, Melissa Maimann, 33, has become the first private midwife in Sydney to be accredited to deliver babies in a public hospital.

She said this was exciting news for expectant mums who want a personalised delivery but might be experiencing a high-risk pregnancy.

Ms Maimann said her model of care was unique in Australia because it included access to a back-up obstetrician.

“I am able to support women with risk-associated pregnancies because obstetric care is available,” she said. “This is a real benefit to women as often those with high-risk pregnancies are limited to obstetric care with little, if any, midwifery input.”

Ms Maimann, who established Essential Birth Consulting five years ago, has helped deliver about 76 babies.

She was profiled in the Leader last December for becoming the first private midwife in St George to receive accreditation to provide Medicare-funded private midwifery services. This has equated to savings of about $2500 a client.

Ms Maimann limits bookings to an average of two births each month to ensure a high quality service for families. She supports natural births, including water birth, and vaginal birth after caesarean, vaginal twin and vaginal breech births.

“We know that continuity of care is the single most important factor for women in the pregnancy and birth care and I am proud to offer it,” she said.

“Women may have care conveniently in their home or in my Bexley clinic.”

There were 295,700 registered births in Australia in 2009, Australian Bureau of Statistics figures showed.

Details: 0400 418 448 or essentialbirthconsulting.com.au

China cuts childbirth mortality rate by promoting hospital births

link

China has slashed the death rate of newborn babies by almost two-thirds in 12 years by promoting hospital births …

Deaths fell from 24.7 per 1,000 live births in 1996 to 9.3 in 2008. Only half of women gave birth in hospital at the start of that period, whereas by the end almost all did so outside the most deprived rural areas.

… “It’s a combination of strengthening facilities, training providers, equipping them with the skills and drugs to offer better care – and, through insurance, encouraging families to give birth in hospitals.

There was still some disparity, with babies in poorer areas four times as likely to die as in wealthier urban areas – apparently reflecting poorer quality services in township hospitals.

“In urban China, babies born in hospital have a very low newborn mortality rate of 5 per 1,000, almost that of the UK, which is 3 to 4 per 1,000,” …

… It is also on course to reduce the maternal mortality ratio by three-quarters …

… the figure [maternal mortality] had fallen from 34.2 per 100,000 to 30 out of 100,000 last year …

Visit my website to explore birthing services.

However we may perceive our public health system …

We have to agree that it is far better than what is described below. Although we have waiting lists, lack of continuity and a perception of impersonal care, our public health system does deliver a basic and safe level of care, and we are so fortunate to live in a country that provides emergency care free to everyone. Anyone who has an emergency is able to access emergency care, whether or not they have a Medicare card. We have a reciprocal health care agreement with certain countries to enable us to care for people from those countries, and for people visiting our country with no reciprocal health agreement and no private health insurance, we provide the basic necessary care to maintain safety. The woman below was not so fortunate.

Link

The contractions had started at dawn. Cecilia Nambozo, a teacher at Busamaga Primary School in Mbale Municipality … checked into a hospital … so she could give birth with expert attention at her disposal.

But that was not to be, for more than 10 hours after Nambozo checked into Mbale Regional Referral Hospital to bring unto the world a life, she was ignored, neglected and writhing in pain. Her crime? She did not have the Shs300,000 the hospital medical staff demanded before they could attend to her. And so she wasted away as her husband, Mr Richard Wesamoyo, made desperate runs around the village to raise the money.

… Nambozo arrived in the hospital at 6am but was reportedly neglected in the Labour Ward until 8pm when she breathed her last. Even then, it is the hospital cleaners who helped remove the baby from her womb … The doctors demanded for Shs300,000, which we could not raise …

… after three hours of waiting and sensing that Nambozo’s situation was deteriorating, she approached a midwife and asked her to attend to her as the husband ran to the village to sell property and raise the money but the midwife and a doctor allegedly declined.

“At about 6pm, Nambozo started gasping; she fell on the floor and was bleeding. That was when the doctor responded and took her into the theatre but it was too late; her life could not be saved. She died.” she said.

The doctor emerged from the theatre after about 10 minutes and announced that both the child and the mother had died …

… his humiliation was iced when medics abandoned his wife’s body in the Labour Ward with the foetus in her womb. He said the body was removed by cleaners.

“They rolled the bed out in the open and started operating her naked for all to see. It was very dehumanising, humiliating for her to be stripped naked by cleaners,” … He said they had been going for antenatal check-ups at the hospital and the midwives had told them the baby was big and that it would be difficult for her to have a normal birth. Apparently, the midwives had recommended a caesarian operation for Nambozo.

… the baby weighed 5.2 kilogrammes and … Nambozo died due to … [uterine rupture]… due to neglect after the uterus malfunctioned, Nambozo had bled to death.

“This lady reached the hospital at 6am and pleaded with the medical workers for an operation because she knew her status but the medics refused to attend to her until her uterus [ruptured]. “… this is not the first case at this hospital; many women have died in labour out of neglect.” …

Visit my website to explore birthing services.

Probiotics tied to lower risk of pregnancy problem

Link

Pregnant women who regularly have milk or yogurt with “good” bacteria may be less likely to suffer the late-pregnancy complication known as pre-eclampsia …

… 4.1 percent developed pre-eclampsia, compared with 5.6 percent of women who did not consume probiotic food.

… probiotic consumers still had a 20 percent lower risk of pre-eclampsia …

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.

    Are home births safe?

    Link

    Jon Barrett is accustomed to dealing with anxious mothers-to-be. As chief of maternal-fetal medicine at Toronto’s Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, one of the main concerns he hears from patients involves unnecessary medical interventions during delivery.

    He acknowledges that the rate of Caesarian sections and episiotomies is far too high … But he’s more unnerved by what that phenomenon appears to be triggering: a surge in demand for home births.

    Barrett’s concerns about home births stem from experience. Between 1990 and 1992, he was part of an obstetric “flying squad” in Newcastle, England. His job was to travel, by ambulance, to the bedsides of women whose home births had gone awry …

    Two incidents are particularly vivid. The first occurred in winter. Navigating the ambulance through snowy laneways, Barrett’s team arrived to find two midwives frantically working over an unconscious woman. She was in shock and hemorrhaging badly. “I’ve never seen so much blood in my life.” She survived, but only after a massive blood transfusion in hospital. The second woman developed pre-eclampsia, which caused seizures, and went into cardiac arrest as his ambulance pulled up. His team was able to restart her heart and intubate her before rushing her to hospital. She also survived. He says both conditions were unpredictable and could have occurred anywhere, “But I know they would have come less close to dying if it would have happened in hospital.”

    Unlike some of his colleagues on the squad who witnessed fetal deaths during home births, if Barrett’s memories were reduced to pure data in a typical study, they’d be unremarkable. That’s because most home birth data measures deaths, not complications, and his patients survived. “If you want a retrospective study, there’s no maternal mortality there . . . and so is that safe? No, it’s just bloody lucky.”

    The question of how best to measure home birth safety has long plagued researchers … what is counted — mortality rates for mothers and babies during childbirth — offers little insight on the maternal side because … maternal deaths from childbirth are rare … But stories like Barrett’s suggest the numbers don’t tell the whole story. In his view, the bottom line should be obvious: “Sooner or later you’re going to get a disaster because that’s the nature of obstetrics.” He adds, “It’s very rare that it will happen, but it’s got to happen more in home birth.”

    That assertion is at the heart of a furious debate in the birthing community. Mothers who choose to give birth at home often cite research showing there are fewer medical interventions and no increased risk. But in the past year, a new study has emerged that contradicts this. It shows that home births are associated with significantly higher death rates for babies. If correct, the rights of women to control their own bodies and birth experience would seem to conflict with the best interests of their children.

    When the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (AJOG) released the now-controversial “Wax Study” last summer, it created the medical equivalent of the Rift Valley amongst birthing experts … [It] confirmed significant benefits to mothers who gave birth at home, including less hemorrhaging, vaginal tearing and epidural use, and fewer infections and Caesarean sections. Unfortunately, these benefits seemed to occur at the baby’s expense: … the report showed that neonatal deaths (defined as deaths within 28 days of birth) were two to three times higher for home births. Clearly, no woman who chooses home birth believes she’s jeopardizing her baby’s health, but the study suggested such faith in the safety of home birthing is undermined by medical evidence. For those who accepted Wax’s results, the benefits of giving birth at home suddenly appeared trivial compared to the risks.

    In many ways, Wax’s study was groundbreaking … a meta-analysis, combined and re-analyzed existing studies, in order to create a bigger sample and, ideally, a more accurate result. He looked at more than 230 peer-reviewed papers published between 1950 and 2009, and selected a dozen that compared planned home births with planned hospital births by low-risk mothers in industrialized countries (Australia, Sweden, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Canada and the U.S.). The study’s vast scope—it encompassed more than 500,000 deliveries—boosted its credibility. As one doctor put it, “half a million births cuts out a lot of noise.”

    Perhaps, but the momentary silence was followed by an outraged roar from home birth supporters, including some whose research showed very different results. “The Wax study is full of mathematical errors,” says Patti Janssen, a professor at the University of British Columbia’s School of Population and Public Health, and lead author of a 2009 cohort study that showed home births to be as safe as hospital births, for women and babies. “The design was wrong, and the calculations were wrong, and it just has to be thrown out the window.” …

    … Wax initially defended his work, but then began refusing interviews … As a flood of letters poured into the AJOG … the publication convened an independent panel to examine the main complaints. In April, it published a sample of those letters, along with a detailed response from Wax. It also released the panel’s conclusion that the study did not need to be retracted.

    But the debate has continued, and gained force, in the wake of a second study … out of the Netherlands … it concluded that babies born to low-risk women, under a midwife’s care (in hospital or at home) are more than twice as likely to die as those born to high-risk women who give birth under an obstetrician.

    Although these results were specific to Holland, and may indicate problems in the way the Dutch system categorizes women as “low- risk,” the study nevertheless provided fresh ammunition to those who believe babies are best delivered by obstetricians, and added fuel to the home birth debate. More letters began to fly, adding to the stack of seemingly contradictory information through which pregnant women are required to sift in order to make an educated decision.

    Nathalie Waite could be the poster mother for the perfect home birth. Waite’s considerations were largely pragmatic when she decided, two years ago, that her fifth baby should be born at home. She had four children attending three different Toronto schools, no nanny, and wanted her delivery to disrupt life as little as possible. It wasn’t a decision she made lightly. Her husband was nervous, but Waite’s midwife reassured them both. They lived near a hospital. Two attending midwives would be in close contact with Waite’s obstetrician and, at the slightest sign of trouble, an ambulance would be in her driveway. Most importantly, Waite knew her own body. She’d had four hospital births. During the two deliveries in which she’d fought … for a natural birth she’d experienced far less pain …

    Had she known what a home delivery would be like, Waite says none of her children would have been born in hospital. “It was purely beautiful.” … “it just felt so natural. It just felt right.”

    This is why home births are special, says Anne Wilson, president of the Canadian Association of Midwives. “It’s a non-medicalized environment where birth becomes a normal part of your family life.” …

    … there is no debating the fact that home births have lower intervention rates. And everyone, on both sides of the argument, agrees that hospital intervention rates are too high …

    His daughter’s birth, in Kingston, Ont., in 2007, was such “a spectacular experience” he and his wife decided to repeat it at their new home in Guelph this year. Unfortunately, their son was born with fluid in his lungs, which concerned their midwife enough to send them to hospital. Everything they experienced from that point on, Shaw says, reinforced their preconceptions. Their son was given blood tests, a chest X-ray and an IV for a condition Shaw believes would have cleared up on its own after several hours. They had to fight for permission to breastfeed … and, he says, when the pediatrician went home without leaving instructions for release, their son remained in an incubator for an additional 15 hours. “Our rights were completely taken away and doctors more or less said this is what we’re going to do to your baby and there’s nothing you can do about it.”

    … Shaw’s mistrust of the medical system runs deep. “I’ve hung around scientists enough to be skeptical of everything I’m told,” … He and his wife refused vitamin K and erythromycin ointment for their children, two treatments hospitals and midwives administer as standard protocol after birth. (Vitamin K ensures the baby’s blood can clot until it starts making the vitamin itself, and erythromycin is an antibiotic that protects against infections from the birth canal that can cause blindness.) …

    In many ways, Shaw and Waite represent opposite ends of the home birth spectrum. Certainly Shaw’s rejection of many of the fundamental tenets of modern medicine contrasts with Waite’s attempt to adapt its benefits to a home birth. But they share an important piece of common ground: both chose to deliver their babies with the help of a midwife.

    Freebirthers, women who deliver without assistance (and often shun prenatal care), represent the smallest sub-section of home birth mothers, and aren’t included in studies on home birth safety. Among their most famous advocates is Janet Fraser, an Australian woman who made famous the term “birth rape” to describe an emergency episiotomy during the birth of her son. “I don’t care if you don’t like the word or the idea, it’s real so get used to it,” … In 2009, Fraser’s baby daughter died after five days of home labour. She continues to advocate for freebirth.

    Freebirthers make most midwives nervous and they horrify obstetricians. Freebirth is the equivalent of playing “Russian roulette with your child,” says André Lalonde, executive vice-president of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada (SOGC). “You don’t play with a child’s life. Especially not where [health care is] free.” That said, the SOGC does believe that midwife-assisted home births are “a reasonable alternative for low-risk women.”

    Yet, asked if he would consider home birth a reasonable option for his family, Lalonde is unequivocal. “No. Definitely not.” He falls back on experience for explanation. “I’ve participated in over 6,000 deliveries in my career and I know that everything looks very fine and suddenly disaster strikes.”

    That conflict between medical experience and faith in a woman’s body to deliver naturally lies at the heart of the home birth debate. But is the concept of natural childbirth in danger of being romanticized? … There is a documentary, popular amongst home birth advocates, entitled Orgasmic Birth; its website invites viewers to “witness the passion as birth is revealed as an integral part of woman’s sexuality and a neglected human right.” Ami McKay’s award-winning novel The Birth House makes a compelling case for home births to a more mainstream audience. In it, the doctor is portrayed as a condescending, patriarchal figure who knocks out his protesting patients with ether, then yanks out their babies. In contrast, the methods of midwife Dora Rare are equally suspect (think mandrake root and witchcraft) yet portrayed with exquisite humanity …

    That kind of experience need not be exclusive to home birth, insist obstetricians. “We should be working to make the environment of the hospital conducive to the home birth experience, rather than having more deliveries at home,” Sunnybrook’s Barrett says.

    But midwives like Anne Wilson maintain there’s nothing to equal the experience of a home birth. “If I am delivering a baby in the hospital, you’re a guest in my house. If I’m delivering a baby at home, I’m a guest in your house. And there’s quite a lot of psychological difference there.” Wilson hopes the demand for home births will continue to rise in Canada … she believes that all low-risk women, including those who choose to give birth in hospital, should deliver with a midwife.

    That’s the system adopted by the Netherlands — and the Evers study suggests it’s failing dramatically …

    “I don’t think it’s that important to debate whether [homebirth is] safe, safer or not safe. I think it’s very important to debate how we can make home birth safer because women are going to do it anyway.”

    In the United States, one way to improve safety is by improving midwifery. Training and regulations are a patchwork across the country; in some states, midwives aren’t even required to finish high school. In that respect, the U.S. lags many industrialized countries, including Canada. It’s one of the reasons Canadian midwives bristle at comparisons.

    In contrast to the U.S., {Canadian] midwives are university educated, highly regulated, and well-trained in emergency skills …

    Obstetricians and midwives are in broad agreement on the key measures necessary to reduce risk during home birth. They are the steps taken by Waite: ideally, a low-risk woman would deliver with the assistance of two highly trained midwives who are in close contact with an obstetrician at a nearby hospital. When those steps are put in place, Wald­man says, “it can work almost as safely as the hospital situation.”

    Is “almost” good enough when you’re talking about the survival of a newborn baby? Although he describes himself as a long-time supporter of midwives and birthing centres, the ACOG’s Waldman echoes his Canadian counterpart, Lalonde, when he says he wouldn’t want a home birth for his wife or daughter. “The intrapartum loss rate has got to be higher at home, it’s just intuitional for anybody who does this work. How big that number is could be debated.”

    And is being debated. As larger and larger studies are undertaken, Sunnybrook’s Jon Barrett believes the data will start to show consistently higher risks associated with home births …

    Visit my website to explore birthing services.

    ‘Illegal’ midwives: Is Australia destined for the same?

    An article from Canada explains their midwifery system which includes unregistered midwives.

    Ann (not her real name) operates outside the regulated profession, living life on the edge, exposed to a constant threat of legal action should births under her watch go wrong.

    She knows five other unregistered midwives working in Montreal’s so-called “parallel network.” They typically help women who are unable to secure legal midwife services to have their babies at home or in a birthing centre, and who reject the official alternative of giving birth in a hospital

    There is no shortage of demand for their services. With just 140 registered midwives able to practise across the entire province, the parallel network fills a yawning gap in the market. Much of the birthing industry – obstetricians, gynecologists and some registered midwives – would consider its covert practitioners to be charlatans. But, to women determined to choose how, where and with whom they give birth, they are valued allies.

    Take Teprine Baldo, who had her eldest child, now 2 years old, at home with the help of what she calls a “midwife recognized by the community. I prefer the term. It’s more respectful. People tend to talk about illegal midwives the way they used to talk about witches,” she says.

    There has been one prosecution over the years. In 2006, Diane Boutin was forced to transfer a woman in her care to … Hospital after complications set in mid-labour. Following an emergency Caesarean, the gynecologist on duty filed a complaint with the provincial order of midwives … which went on to successfully pursue Boutin for illegal practice under Quebec’s professional code, a felony carrying a fine of up to $6,000.

    In the days before the profession began its slow march toward legalization in the 1990s, all midwives were renegades operating outside the system, some entirely self-taught, others holding foreign qualifications unrecognized by the province. But, times have changed and as the now-regulated profession wages a PR battle for public acceptance, pushing against residual resistance from an often skeptical medical establishment, it cannot be seen to condone illegal practice.

    parents are likely to be the biggest losers when things go wrong, should newborns be left damaged as a direct result of negligence or malpractice.

    It’s a hugely sensitive issue. Sinclair Harris, a registered midwife at Pointe Claire birthing centre, is sympathetic with her unregistered counterparts. But, she says, “You need an understanding of pathology, of the things that can go wrong, if you are to be available for the mainstream public.”

    Women like Baldo are incredulous that they are still being denied that choice, outraged that the black market midwives helping the most determined to exercise basic rights over their bodies risk prosecution.

    “It’s like we’re being told we can’t birth properly,” she says. “I’m not against hospitals. My issue is that there’s often no alternative.”

    At 32 weeks, she dropped out of the system, switching to an unregistered midwife

    Seeking closure after a traumatic first birth in hospital, Caroline Gauthier gave birth to her second child at home with an unregistered midwife.

    She was living in British Columbia, pregnant with her first child, when her dream of an intervention-free home birth went awry. Transferred to hospital by her registered midwife after her cervix was slow to dilate, she was administered hormones to speed up labour.

    “I was like Jabba the Hutt, hooked up to the monitor,” she says. Staff forgot to turn on the oxygen supply to her mask, leaving her flailing about for help. When her baby finally arrived after a traumatic final push, she was barely able to touch his foot before he was whisked away.

    Pregnant with her second child in Quebec, she immediately set about trying to secure a midwife at the Du Boisé birthing centre in the Laurentians. However, her place was contingent on her delivering at the birthing centre.

    But Gauthier had already set her heart on giving birth at home. At 32 weeks, she dropped out of the system, switching to an unregistered midwife. Again, her labour was long, but she sat out the hours in the bath and in bed. “This time, I had a midwife who didn’t have a system to please,” she says.

    After three days of labour, the baby’s head popped out while she was on her way to the bath. “In less than two minutes, the whole body was out,” she says. He didn’t immediately cry, “but nobody made a circus out of it.”

    Vindicated by her second experience, she is now a fierce advocate of women’s right to give birth as they choose. “I was given the time my baby needed,” she says. “My neighbours tell me I was so brave delivering at home. My reaction is: ‘My God, you’re brave giving birth in hospital. You’re putting yourself at their mercy. You don’t know what you’re getting yourself into.’ ”

    The midwife: With no insurance, every new client is a gamble

    On D-day, Ann arrives on the scene with a case containing oxygen supplies, a heart monitor, synthetic oxytocin, herbal remedies, suture material and local anesthetic for stitches.

    She has been practising midwifery in the parallel network for more than 10 years. Clients find their way to her by word of mouth. She has a busy schedule year round, attending to three or four clients a month.

    Clients are generally women who have been unable to find a registered midwife …

    Occasionally she has transferred cases to hospital …

    With no insurance, every new client is a gamble. “My insurance is the trust I develop with the parents. I trust people who have the deep belief that it’s best for the birth of the baby. Nobody can be sure of the end result.”

    There is a contract, though she is clearly ill at ease with cold legal realities. “It’s about ensuring the parents understand what they’re getting into,” she says. “But, sometimes I forget to get people to sign. We’re on another level. It’s not about business.”

    She describes herself as a self-taught midwife eschewing a system where midwives are “too stressed, too watched.” …

    The four-year university program didn’t appeal to her. “I thought it was too focused on pathology. There was no alternative medicine. No spirituality,” she says. “It’s as if only one kind of intelligence is allowed. Forget emotional intelligence.”

    Midwifery was legalized in Quebec in 1999, following a five-year pilot project. Home births with the assistance of registered midwives have only been allowed since 2005.

    In a 2007 Statistics Canada report, 71 per cent of women who had delivered with a registered midwife rated the experience as “very positive,” compared with 53 per cent of women who had delivered in a hospital.

    According to research … midwife-assisted home births are associated with lower rates of obstetric interventions and adverse outcomes. Newborns born at home were also less likely to require resuscitation or oxygen therapy.

    Australia is heading for a similar situation, brought about by a few factors: the recent position statement on homebirth which effectively prevents midwives from attending high risk births at home, the lack of visiting rights to enable most midwives to birth in hospital with their clients, dissatisfaction with current hospital-based maternity services that are seen by women to be impersonal and highly interventionist, and a differing view of things such as risk and responsibility. Although some midwives are making the choice to unregister and continue to attend births, they do face the same issues that are explained in the article.

    Visit my website to explore homebirth and hospital birth.

    Smoking’s effect on unborn babies revealed

    Link

    Unborn babies exposed to nicotine have a higher risk of high blood pressure and heart disease growing up.

    … researchers now know why the nicotine exposure – including from patches and gum – has the effect:

    … the addictive substance causes the formation of potentially damaging chemicals, known as reactive oxygen species, in the blood vessel walls of the foetus.

    … nicotine patches and gum, commonly used by people trying to kick their smoking habit, could have the same effect.

    … the study proved the long-term harm nicotine caused to children from a young age or as a foetus.

    … “Both babies whose mothers smoke while pregnant and babies who are exposed to second-hand smoke after birth are more likely to die from sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) than babies who are not exposed to cigarette smoke.”

    She said babies whose mothers smoke while pregnant or who are exposed to second-hand smoke after birth also have weaker lungs than unexposed babies, which increases the risk of many health problems later in life.

    Visit my website to explore homebirth and hospital birth.

    “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.

    Mum’s stress is passed to baby in the womb

    Link

    A mother’s stress can spread to her baby in the womb and may cause a lasting effect …

    … a receptor for stress hormones appears to undergo a biological change in the unborn child if the mother is highly stressed …

    And this change may leave the child less able to handle stress themselves.

    It has already been linked to mental illness and behavioural problems.

    … the women involved in the study had exceptional home circumstances and that most pregnant women would not be exposed to such levels of stress day in and day out.

    … the researchers say the findings are not conclusive – many other factors, including the child’s social environment while growing up, might be involved.

    … But they suspect it is the child’s earliest environment, the womb, that is key.

    … Some of the teens had changes to one particular gene … that helps regulate the body’s hormonal response to stress.

    Such genetic alterations typically happen while the baby is still developing in the womb.

    And the scientists believe they are triggered by the mum-to-be’s poor state of emotional wellbeing at the time of the pregnancy.

    … “It would appear that babies who get signals from their mum that they are being born into a dangerous world are faster responders. They have a lower threshold for stress and seem to be more sensitive to it.”…

    Visit my website to explore homebirth and hospital birth.