| Four Routine Childbirth Procedures that Don't Help and Can Hurt | |
|
NEW YORK, Jan. 21 /PR Newswire/ -- "Unfortunately,
what some obstetricians think they know can hurt you," says Henci
Goer, who distilled information from hundreds of medical studies for her
book, "The Thinking Woman's Guide to a Better Birth," recently
published by Berkley/NAL Publicity. "The research does not support
many routine labor practices." These include:
-- Snipping the vaginal opening for birth (episiotomy): Nearly half of
women birthing vaginally still have episiotomies despite overwhelming
evidence that episiotomies don't do any of the things claimed for
them--prevent deep tears, preserve the strength of the pelvic floor
muscles, prevent fetal distress. In fact, episiotomies cause deep tears,
as any woman who has ever snipped a piece of fabric to tear off a length
will understand. Episiotomy complications include pain, increased blood
loss, and sometimes infection. Mainly because they lead to rectal tears,
episiotomies can also result in long-term or chronic pain or pain during
intercourse, stool incontinence, and the formation of an opening between
the vagina and the rectum. -- Continuous electronic fetal monitoring: Once hailed as the
technology that would save babies from brain injury during labor, the use
of continuous monitoring has steadily grown even as study after study
concluded that it doesn't work. When compared with periodically listening
to the baby's heart, continuous monitoring increases the odds of cesarean
section and instrumental delivery without improving newborn outcomes.
Hospital staffs now argue that hospitals don't have enough nurses to
listen as often as they should or that the monitor strip provides evidence
in malpractice suits. The first rationale says that hospitals don't have
enough nurses to look after laboring women properly, the second that
hospitals are willing to subject women to something that benefits
hospitals at their patients' expense. -- Rupturing membranes: Breaking the bag of waters can shorten labor by
an hour or so, but the point of speeding up labor is to prevent cesarean
section for poor progress. However, nine studies randomly assigning women
to have membranes routinely ruptured or not all found a slight increase in
cesareans in the "rupture membranes" group. Meanwhile, walking
in labor and pushing in an upright position may do more to shorten labor
than rupturing membranes and pose no risks whatever. -- I.Vs./no food or drink in labor: According to many doctors, women
must not eat or drink in labor in case they suddenly need general
anesthesia. Women could vomit while unconscious and choke. An I.V. is
supposedly a risk-free replacement. However, in three large U.S. studies
totaling 78,000 laboring women who ate and drank freely, not one woman
choked under anesthesia. Also, anesthesia-related complication rates in
countries permitting eating and drinking in labor don't exceed U.S. rates.
This is because modern anesthetic technique requires putting a tube down
the throat to protect the airway. In addition, few cesareans these days
are done under general anesthesia. Meanwhile, I.V.s cause pain and inhibit
mobility. They not infrequently overload fluids, which can lead to blood
chemistry imbalances in mother and baby, fluid in mothers' and babies'
lungs, and anemia in the mother, which increases the odds of heavy
bleeding after the birth. Sugar-containing I.V.s can raise mothers' and
babies' blood sugar to diabetic levels. This has its own
complications. "All procedures have risks as well as benefits," Goer warns.
"If they are used routinely rather than to treat specific problems,
there are no benefits, and only risks remain." SOURCE: Berkley/NAL Publicity ST: New York |
|
This press release may not be redistributed without prior written approval by PR Newswire. |
|
| Posted January 21, 2000. |
Go to: