Looking for something? Start here.
Custom Search

 

Want The Unnecesarean in your inbox? Enter your email address:




 

   

« Billing Insurance for Hospital Birth | The Man-Nurse Diaries on New Joint Commission Guidelines »
Thursday
May062010

Cite 'em if you've got 'em

Posted by Jill—Unnecesarean

I got a request for U.S. statistics and sources on the following items for a project that someone is working on.

  • Induction
  • Accuracy of ultrasounds in determining due dates
  • Percentage of women that give birth on their backs
  • Percentage that have IV’s
  • Shaving?
  • Enemas?
  • Amniotomy
  • Fetal monitors
  • Epidurals/pain relief
  • Pitocin – during/after
  • Episiotomy
  • Forceps/vacuum
  • c-section – rate – 32.3, cost compared to vaginal delivery, european rate
  • immediate cord clamping
  • separation of mother/baby after birth

If you can think of a source and have the time to link it up, it would be appreciated.

By the way, who knows anyone that’s had an enema in the hospital in recent years? The only enemas I ever hear about are “Triple H” enemas occasionally recommended by some midwives. I don’t know anyone who’s been shaved in recent years, either.


 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (19)

I don't know about shaving for vaginal deliveries, but I think it is routine for them to shave at the site of the incision for the c-section... I know they did that for me...

May 6, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterJennifer

This isn't helpful to you, but I'm also curious as to what % of those who get an epidural end up with a fine vaginal birth with no other complications. That is, while I know x% will end up with a c/s, spinal headache, only one side numb, instrument delivery, etc etc etc (well, I don't actually know off hand but I imagine I could find it?), I would like to be able to say something like, "yes, it is true that x% of women who opt for an epidural manage to use it as an effective tool and the rest of the birth goes fine with no other interventions or complications." Maybe this is too hard to tease out? Thanks a million for all you do.

May 6, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterAnother Rachel

I got VBAC, C-Sections, and Episiotomies for all of Connecticut by Hospital

May 6, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterDanielle

Weird - I posted earlier but it must have gotten eaten by the internet gods.

The Listening to Mothers Survey is the most reliable source for all of the above except timing of cord clamping, shaving, ultrasound for fetal weight estimate and possibly enema (they may have recorded that - can't remember.) http://www.childbirthconnection.org/article.asp?ck=10396

When I was a midwifery student, I did some shifts at North Central Bronx which is a haven for midwife-led care in a low-income section of NYC. They used enemas frequently. Not routine, but it was their first-line intervention for anyone whose labor slowed down.

May 6, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterAmy Romano

Ahhh, just realized my lack of post earlier was because I didn't see the capcha (sp?). Is that an example of "gotcha capcha-ism"?

May 6, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterAmy Romano

Induction - here is one citation:

"Induction of labor is increasing in the United States—from 9.5% of births in 1990 to 22.1% of births in 2004."

http://www.annals.org/content/151/4/252.long

May 6, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterKK

Ultrasound for fetal weight estimation:

"Among term parturients, clinical estimates had significantly higher accuracy than ones derived sonographically."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10804488


"For one in four women, however, the fetal weight estimation was more than 10% different from the actual birth weight of their infant."

http://www.nzma.org.nz/journal/119-1241/2146/

May 6, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterKK

Amy, I'm sorry about the eaten comments. Squarespace comments are consistently unreliable and their repeated attempts to fix the ongoing problem have failed. It's very frustrating.

May 6, 2010 | Registered CommenterJill

I am really starting to become skeptical of pretty much any stats anymore. If they're not reporting maternal deaths properly, who's to say that they're reporting anything else properly?

When my sister had her second child, my mother asked the nurse, "What percentage of your moms get pitocin?" She said, "80% during labor, and 100% for the management of 3rd stage." I seriously, seriously, seriously doubt that their stats would reflect that.

May 6, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterAugusta

At the risk of being obvious, the researcher should make sure to do some work with Google Scholar. I consider myself an excellent googler, due in part to an RA-ship in college -- but I never realized how valuable Google Scholar was until I was writing my most recent paper. Filtering out non-academic search results makes it soooo much easier.

May 6, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterJMT
Comments for this entry have been disabled. Additional comments may not be added to this entry at this time.