24h-payday

Archive

Archive for the ‘Healthy Care Practices’ Category

60 Tips for Healthy Birth – Resources for Students and Suggested Teaching Activities

February 12th, 2014 by avatar

GBWC buttonIf you are in any way familiar with Lamaze International, hopefully you are aware of the Six Healthy Birth Practices.  Many years ago, I fell in love with these nifty “guidelines” that supported and reinforced everything that I had been teaching in my childbirth classes. These six care practices promoting safe and healthy birth each have their own list of citations of research supporting each care practice and a short, but extremely informative video to go along with each one.  As it has been a few years since the Six Healthy Birth Practices was released, Lamaze International is in the process of updating the citation sheets to source the most current information.

I want to bring your attention to a fantastic resource guide on the Six Healthy Care Practices that Community Manager Cara Terreri put together on Giving Birth With Confidence,  the Lamaze blog for parents and expectant families.  Cara created the “Sixty Tips for Healthy Birth” series, and in six separate blog posts provides ten tips for each Birth Practice that highlights working toward a healthy birth practice that promotes physiological birth.

60 Tips for Healthy Birth – From Giving Birth With Confidence

Part 1: Let Labor Begin on Its Own

Part 2: Walk, Move Around and Change Positions Throughout Labor

Part 3: Bring a Loved One, Friend or Doula for Continuous Support

Part 4: Avoid Interventions that Are Not Medically Necessary

Part 5: Avoid Giving Birth on Your Back and Follow Your Body’s Urges to Push

Part 6: Keep Mother and Baby Together, It’s Best for Mother, Baby and Breastfeeding

Teaching Activities Using the Sixty Tips

childbirth ed classI have created several interactive teaching activities using Cara’s tips.  As each Healthy Birth Practice come up in your class, have the ten tips from the GBWC blog on strips of paper or small cards available to each family for individual work, or larger laminated cards for small group or whole class work.  Ask the families (or the class as a whole) to sort the cards into a logical order from easiest to hardest to accomplish.  They can indicate which tips have already been completed in their family and which ones might still be left to do.  If they completed the activity by individual family, facilitate a discussion as they share with the whole class.  If you conduct this activity as a whole class, this discussion will unfold naturally of course.  Alternately, they can sort the cards into the most important to least important for achieving this goal.  Or any other number of ways.

Families can build confidence that they have already successfully achieved several of the recommendations and identify things they still can do to support the type of birth they are planning.  They can also connect with other families, recognizing that everyone is working hard to be prepared.

Another way to use these tips in class is to provide the tips as a checklist and ask families to check off those that they have completed.  Ask families to challenge themselves to complete one of the items that they have not already done.  If it is a series class, you can check in at the end of the series and award a small prize to the family that has completed the largest number of tips.

A third suggestion is to ask students to add their own tips or create their own list for each Healthy Birth Practice.  Using newsprint, have one sheet for each Healthy Birth Practice, and break the class into groups, with each group working on one of the Practices, creating their own thoughts to go along with the 60 that Cara shared.

How do you see using the Sixty Tips for Healthy Birth in your childbirth classes?  Please share your ideas in our comments section so we can all learn and collaborate on great teaching ideas that help families have safer and healthier birth experiences.

 

 

 

Childbirth Education, Giving Birth with Confidence, Healthy Birth Practices, Healthy Care Practices, Maternity Care , , , , ,

Cochrane Systematic Review Supports Lamaze Healthy Birth Practice #2- Walk, Move Around And Change Positions Throughout Labor

December 19th, 2013 by avatar
Image Source: © Sharon Muza

Image Source: © Sharon Muza

Today, author Henci Goer takes a look at a new Cochrane Systematic Review; “Maternal positions and mobility during first stage labour” and finds that the results of this review support the 2nd Lamaze International Healthy Birth Practice: Walk, move around and change positions throughout labor. Families taking Lamaze childbirth classes learn how they can promote physiologic birth by using a variety of positions throughout their labor, but women don’t have to take a childbirth class to know that walking and trying different positions reduces pain and speeds up labor.  Intuitively, women respond to the needs of their baby and their body during labor.  Henci examines the review and shares some of the benefits that were found in the women who followed the 2nd Healthy Birth Practice to promote safe and healthy birth. – Sharon Muza, Community Manager.

Advocates for physiologic care in labor will be pleased, although not surprised, to know that a Cochrane systematic review supports mobility and upright positioning in first-stage labor (the cervical dilation phase) (Lawrence 2013.) The review includes 18 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comprising 3337 women not having epidurals at trial entry and 7 trials comprising 1881 women in which all participants had epidurals or combined spinal-epidurals at trial entry.

The body of data poses challenges in analysis and interpretation. Trials were published between 1963 and 2012 and conducted in 13 countries. As reviewers note, this means that they took place in highly varied cultural and healthcare contexts, equally varied expectations on the part of staff and laboring women, and with evolving healthcare technologies, all of which could influence results. In addition, comparison “treatment” and “control” groups also varied widely and overlapped among them. So, for example, one trial compared walking with remaining in bed in whatever posture, including upright postures; another compared walking with recumbent postures; and still another combined sitting and walking as upright postures and compared them with recumbent postures. That being said, here is what the reviewers found:

Compared with recumbent postures and bed care, upright postures and walking in women without epidurals at trial entry:

• Shortened first-stage labor duration by a mean difference of 1 hour 22 minutes in women overall (15 trials, 2503 women) and by 1 hour 13 minutes in first-time mothers (12 trials, 1486 women). In women with prior births (4 trials, 662 women), duration differed by only 34 minutes, and the difference just missed achieving statistical significance, that is, statistical analysis shows that the difference is unlikely to be due to chance. By comparison, rupturing membranes, commonly used to “get the show on the road,” had no effect on first-stage duration in women overall (5 trials, 1127 women) (Smyth 2013), and too few women were reported according to first-time or prior births to draw meaningful conclusions.

• Decreased likelihood of cesarean delivery (14 trials, 2682 women) by 30%. Likelihood decreased by 20% in first-time mothers (8 trials, 1237 women) and 40% in women with prior births (4 trials, 775 women), but the differences didn’t achieve statistical significance probably because aggregated numbers were too small (underpowered) and cesarean rates too low to detect a difference. By contrast, rupturing membranes increases the likelihood of cesarean surgery by 30%, a risk that misses achieving statistical significance by a whisker and probably would have achieved significance had not so many women assigned to “conserve membranes” actually had their membranes ruptured (Smyth 2013).

• Reduced use of epidural analgesia (9 trials, 2107 women) by 20%.

• Didn’t increase satisfaction or decrease complaints of pain, but only one small study (107 women) measured satisfaction, and among the three trials (338 women) evaluating pain, women reported less pain in two of them, but in the third (201 women), which comprised 60% of the population overall, participants assigned to sit or walk were not allowed to lie down at any time during first stage. Bloom et al. (1998), by far the largest of any of the trials at 1067 participants, wasn’t included in the pain and satisfaction assessments probably because they took a different approach. They asked women who walked whether they would want to walk in a future labor. Ninety-nine percent said “Yes,” which would seem a ringing endorsement of ambulation.

• Showed no evidence of increasing maternal, fetal, or neonatal harm. In fact, one small trial (200 women) reported significantly fewer admissions to neonatal intensive care.

Benefits were maintained when subgroupings of upright postures were compared with subgroupings of recumbent postures, as for example, walking compared with recumbent/supine/lateral or sitting and standing, squatting, kneeling, or walking compared with recumbent/supine/lateral.

No benefits were found for walking or upright postures (7 trials, 1881 women) in women who had epidurals or combined spinal-epidurals at trial entry. This doesn’t really mean much, though, because in some trials, substantial percentages of women assigned to walk didn’t actually do so, and in others “ambulation” was defined to be as little as 5 minutes of walking per hour.

The review leaves some questions open: Can mobility be used to treat delayed progress? Should women with ruptured membranes be allowed to walk? What about women at risk for fetal compromise? To the first question, it makes sense to encourage walking and upright positioning as a first-line measure to treat progress delay. The alternatives, rupturing membranes and oxytocin augmentation, have potential harms while walking and position changes don’t. To the second, when upright, gravity would tend to bring the presenting part downward to block the cervical opening, thereby protecting against umbilical cord prolapse. A common sense approach might be to monitor fetal heart tones throughout a contraction upon the woman first assuming an upright position and repeat whenever she returns to an upright position after lying down. To the last question, studies would need to be done, but rupturing membranes increases risk of fetal compromise by releasing the fluid that prevents umbilical cord compression (you can’t compress a liquid), and augmentation increases contraction intensity, which also could increase risk of compromise in a vulnerable fetus.

The true benefits of mobility are almost certainly much greater than the review shows. This is because RCTs are analyzed according to “intent to treat,” that is, participants are kept with their assigned group regardless of their actual treatment. To do otherwise would negate the point of random assignment, which is to avoid bias; however, when substantial percentages of participants receive the treatment of the other group, as is the case with many of the mobility RCTs, it both diminishes differences between groups and makes it harder to detect a significant difference between them. This was a problem in all the mobility RCTs, not just the ones where women already had regional analgesia on board. Again, take Bloom et al. (1998): among women assigned to walk, 22%—approaching 1 in 4—never walked at all, and of the women who did, the mean time spent out of bed was an hour mostly because of policies that kept them in, or returned them to, bed.

The reviewers conclude:

[W]e believe wherever possible, women should be informed of the benefits of upright positions, encouraged and supported to take up whatever positions they choose, they should not have their freedom of movement options restricted unless clinically indicated, and they should avoid spending long periods supine (p. 23).

It isn’t enough, though, to advise women that it’s a good idea to stay mobile and stay off their backs unless staff follow through on not restricting freedom of movement. As matters currently stand, conventional hospital labor management couldn’t do a better job of restricting mobility if that were its intended goal. To turn that around, hospitals would need to:

• Provide an environment conducive to mobility, including ample space for moving around and props such as birth balls, rocking chairs, and cushions,

• Provide comfort measures such as hot and cold packs, private showers, and soaking tubs to reduce and delay use of epidural analgesia,

• Train staff in encouraging and providing physical assistance in changing positions, in the use of mobility props, and in how to provide emotionally supportive care,

• Welcome doulas who can share the burden of providing physical and emotional support,

• Use intermittent listening to fetal heart tones except when continuous monitoring is medically indicated,

• Reserve IVs for medical indications, which would mean allowing women oral intake of fluids and calories, and

• When mobility-inhibiting interventions are required or the woman desires an epidural, minimize their impact by such measures as telemetry monitoring, inserting IV catheters in the forearm rather than the hand or wrist or using saline locks instead of IVs, and encouraging women with epidurals to assume upright positions and change positions periodically.

In other words, promoting mobility in labor is the proverbial tip of the iceberg. Floating below is the vast bulk of providing physiologic care. That won’t be easy for a number of reasons.

For one thing, medical research principles require that investigators define the intervention under evaluation precisely and maximize compliance with its administration. But this is the direct opposite of women doing what instinctively feels best in an environment that encourages their experimentation and is free from elements that inhibit or restrict them. We have no trials that compare this style of care with conventional medical-model management, which means we don’t have data showing the true degree of harm arising from confining and circumscribing mobility in labor or the magnitude of the benefits to be gained with promoting it. Without that knowledge, there is little incentive to change.

For another, in the topsy-turvy world of medical-model research, maternal movements and physiologically normal behaviors are framed as “interventions.” This means that being up and around and having the freedom to labor in the positions of the woman’s choice has to prove itself, not confinement to bed and positioning restriction. What is more, to institute change, the “intervention” must prove itself superior according to medical model concepts of improved outcomes, or conventional management stands, however much that management lacks an evidence basis. This explains how Bloom and colleagues could entitle their trial “Lack of effect of walking on labor and delivery” despite walking having no harms and 99% of women who walked wanting to do so again in a future labor.

Finally, powerful forces line up against instituting the sweeping changes that would be required to convert to mobility-friendly care. Inertia is one. People will generally resist change even when it benefits them personally, which in this case it doesn’t. Economics is another. The costs of maintaining a 24/7 obstetric analgesia service demand that most women have epidurals while any renovation expenses, such as providing private showers, soaking tubs, or telemetry monitoring, would not be reimbursed. Hospital culture is perhaps the biggest obstacle of all. “This is the way we’ve always done it” and “what is must be right” are potent impediments to improvement. Specifically, so long as reducing cesarean rates isn’t a shared, strongly-held goal—and a cursory glance at hospital cesarean rates shows that it isn’t in most hospitals—motivation to change will be low.

All of this is to say that reform won’t be easy, not that it can’t be done, and, I would add, the wellbeing of mothers and babies obliges us to try. In that interest, can we crowd source strategies? Are any hospitals in your community mobility friendly? What are their practices and policies? Have any of you been involved in projects to increase mobility in labor, and if so, what went well and what would you do differently?

References

Bloom, S. L., McIntire, D. D., Kelly, M. A., Beimer, H. L., Burpo, R. H., Garcia, M. A., & Leveno, K. J. (1998). Lack of effect of walking on labor and delivery. N Engl J Med, 339(2), 76-79. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9654537?dopt=Citation

Lawrence, A., Lewis, L., Hofmeyr, G. J., & Styles, C. (2013). Maternal positions and mobility during first stage labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 10, CD003934. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003934.pub4 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24105444

Smyth, R. M., Markham, C., & Dowswell, T. (2013). Amniotomy for shortening spontaneous labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 6, CD006167. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006167.pub4 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23780653

 

Evidence Based Medicine, Guest Posts, Healthy Birth Practices, Healthy Care Practices, New Research, Push for Your Baby, Research , , , , , ,

Midwives Alliance of North America (MANA) Invites You to Research Home Birth!

October 31st, 2013 by avatar

This past weekend I attended the Midwives Alliance of North America (MANA) annual conference; Birthing Social Change in Portland, OR. The conference was attended by more than 300 midwives and their supporters. I thoroughly enjoyed the variety of general sessions and the concurrents I attended. Eugene DeClerq, (did you know he is an LCCE!) a principal investigator on the Listening to Mothers project and the genius behind the Birth by the Numbers website, was brilliant as usual in sharing all kinds of data about the state of birth in the USA. Another keynote speaker, Melissa Cheyney, PhD, CPM, LDM, Division of Research Chairperson for MANA, provided members with an update on the MANA Stats Project. The MANA Stats Project is a multi-year registry collecting data mostly about out-of-hospital births, though some Certified Nurse Midwives are using it for tracking both home and hospital births as well.

At the conference, two much-anticipated research studies were announced. You can learn more about the articles and MANA stats in a recent post at the MANA blog here. Science & Sensibility is looking forward to sharing a review and information about these studies with you here on our blog in the early part of next year, when they are released in the Jan/Feb 2014 issue of the Journal of Midwifery and Women’s Health.

The MANA Stats registry is currently collecting more than 1,000 records per month, mostly from midwives who attend out of hospital births in the United States. The first set of records – representing more than 20,000 births – is currently available to researchers. According to Melissa Cheyney, “These datasets include some of the only U.S. data that exists regarding physiologic, low-intervention labor and birth — data that are becoming more and more rare due to the increase in “routine” interventions in the hospital setting.”

As the data set grows and more records are added, the power and possibility of exploring information contained gets even more exciting. Did you know that the data is being made available to researchers interested in conducting some analysis? Could this be you? Professionals may think that they need to be affiliated with a large research institution, but that is not the case.

All researchers applying for the data are required to have what’s known as “IRB approval,” meaning an academic institution willing and able to ensure that the research design appropriately protects the subjects’ confidentiality. However, MANA has a unique program in place that allows non-academic researchers to access the data. The program connects mothers, advocates, and others interested in research with researchers that can provide support and mentorship. You can learn more about this program – called “ConnectMe” – here 

It would be wonderful if a Lamaze Certified Childbirth Educator with the skill and abilities to do some analysis joined forces with researchers through the “ConnectMe” program and this information could be published in a professional journal! The possibilities are endless. Do you think this could be you?

It was interesting and exciting to spend time with all the midwives who are working every day to to help women and babies experience safe, healthy births and are practicing the Lamaze International Six Healthy Birth Practices that we know leads to better birth outcomes.

For more information for researchers to learn more about the dataset and how to apply, click here.

Childbirth Education, Evidence Based Medicine, Healthy Birth Practices, Healthy Care Practices, Home Birth, Midwifery, New Research, Research, Research Opportunities , , , , , , , , ,

Lamaze International Releases Valuable Cesarean Infographic For You To Share!

October 10th, 2013 by avatar

Lamaze International has long been a leader in providing resources for both parents and birth professionals that promote safe and healthy birth for women and babies.  Evidence based information, appealing handouts, useful webinars for both parents and professionals, continuing education opportunities and more can all be found within the Lamaze International structure.  In May, 2012, Lamaze International released  (and later went on to be a co-winner for the 2013 Nonprofit PR Award for Digital PR and Marketing) the Push For Your Baby campaign, which encouraged families to “push for better” and “spot the best care,” providing resources to help parents wade through the overabundance of often inaccurate information swimming past them, and make choices that support a healthy pregnancy, a healthy birth and a healthy mother and baby.

Today, as I make my way to New Orleans, to join other professionals at the 2013 Annual Lamaze International Conference, “Let the Good Times Roll for Safe and Healthy Birth,” Lamaze International is pleased to announce the release of a useful and appealing infographic titled “What’s the Deal with Cesareans?” In the USA today, 1 in 3 mothers will give birth by cesarean section.  While, many cesareans are necessary, others are often a result of interventions performed at the end of pregnancy or during labor for no medical reason.  For many families, easy to understand, accurate information is hard to find and they feel pressure to follow their health care provider’s suggestions, even if it is not evidence based or following best practice guidelines.

Families taking Lamaze classes are learning about the Six Healthy Birth Practices, which can help them to avoid unnecessary interventions. Now, Lamaze childbirth educators and others can share (and post in their classrooms) this attractive infographic that highlights the situation of too many unneeded cesareans in our country.  Parents and educators alike can easily see what the risks of cesarean surgery to mother and baby are, and learn how to reduce the likelihood of having a cesarean in the absence of medical need.

In this infographic, women are encouraged to take Lamaze childbirth classes, work with a doula, select a provider with a low rate of cesarean births, advocate for vaginal birth after cesarean and follow the Six Healthy Care Practices, to set themselves up for the best birth possible.  This infographic clearly states the problem of unneeded cesareans, the risks to mother and baby, and provides do-able actions steps.

It is time for women to become the best advocate possible for their birth and their baby.  With this appealing, useful and informative infographic poster, families can and will make better choices and know to seek out additional information and resources.

Educators and other birth professionals, you can find a high resolution infographic to download and print here.

Send your families to the Lamaze International site for parents, to find the infographic and other useful information on cesarean surgery.

For Lamaze members, log in to our professional site to access this infographic and a whole slew of other useful classroom activities, handouts and information sheets.

I am proud to say that I am a Lamaze Certified Childbirth Educator, and that my organization, Lamaze International, is leading the way in advocating for healthier births for mothers and babies through sources such as the “What’s the Deal with Cesareans?” infographic and other evidence based information and resources.  Thank you Lamaze!

What do you think of this infographic?  How are you going to use it with the families you work with?  Can you think of how you might incorporate this into your childbirth classes or discuss with clients and patients?  Let us know in the comments section, we would love your feedback!  And, see you at the conference!

 

 

Babies, Cesarean Birth, Evidence Based Medicine, Healthy Birth Practices, Healthy Care Practices, informed Consent, Lamaze International, Lamaze International 2013 Annual Conference, Maternal Quality Improvement, Maternity Care, Medical Interventions, Newborns, Patient Advocacy, Push for Your Baby , , , , , , , , ,

Remembering Dr. John Kennell and His Great Contributions to Mothers and Babies Worldwide

September 5th, 2013 by avatar

It was with great sadness that I read about the death of Dr. John Kennell on August 27, 2013 in Cleveland, OH.  Dr. Kennell, a pediatrician and researcher, had a long history of contributions to the field of maternal infant bonding and attachment, especially at birth and in the early postpartum period  

Every time a mother opens her arms to receive her newborn baby on her chest (in line with Lamaze Healthy Care Practice #6) at the moment of birth it is a credit to the work of Dr. Kennell and his colleagues, especially his longtime collaborator,  Dr. Marshall Klaus.  Dr. Kennell examined and researched the connection (both physiological and emotional) of the newborn and its mother.  As a result of his research, the practice of separating mothers from their babies for hours or even days after birth has all but disappeared in the USA and many places around the world. Prior to Dr. Kennell’s work, little was understood about the newborn’s innate need to be close to and kept with its mother as it made the transition to life on the outside.

Our results reveal suggestive evidence of species-specific behavior in human mothers at the first contact with their full-term infants and suggest that a re-evaluation is required of the present hospital policies which regulate care of the mother and infant. (Klaus, 1970)

Additionally, Dr. Kennell helped clarify the importance of families connecting with their babies who did not survive or died shortly after birth.  Suggesting that time to hold, examine, and say goodby to a baby who passed away was helpful in processing grief and coming to terms with their loss,  has changed how stillbirth and neonatal death is handled in our hospitals.  For babies who are in the neonatal intensive care unit, the importance of promoting mother-infant bonding and attachment is now recognized as a critical part of the care plan.

Dr Kennell’s research has caused hospitals to completely change the methodology of the birth and postpartum experiences for the babies born in there facilities, supporting contact during the first hours and instituting a “rooming-in” policy that allowed mothers and babies to stay together during the postpartum stay.  Even NICU facilities are accommodating parents with couches that turn into beds right on the units, near the babies needing care special care.

These observations suggest that there may be major perinatal benefits of constant human support during labor. (Rosa et.al. 1980)

Dr. Kennell was one of the very first scientists to research and investigate the benefits of continuous labor support for birthing women, and along with Dr Klaus, Penny Simkin, Annie Kennedy and Phyllis Klaus, founded Doulas of North America, which later became DONA International, a well respected, worldwide doula organization committed to training both birth and postpartum doulas and providing a doula for every woman who wants one.  Since being established in 1992, DONA International has certified over 8000 birth and postpartum doulas and has members in over 50 countries around the world.  Many, many thousands of women have birthed with the support of doula, enjoying the benefits observed by Drs. Kennell and Klaus when they first started their research, and documented again and again since then; shorter labors, lower cesarean rates and reduced interventions. (Kennell, et. al. 1991)

If a doula were a drug, it would be unethical not to use it. – John Kennell, M.D.

 

© http://flic.kr/p/tvZYD

Dr. Kennell was the co-author of several books, including ”Bonding: Building the Foundations of Secure Attachment and Independence” and “The Doula Book: How a Trained Labor Companion Can Help You Have A Shorter, Easier and Healthier Birth.” as well as a goldmine of research papers.  He was known for his gentle, caring and compassionate nature as well as his brilliant mind and wonderful sense of humor.

Please join me in extending the deepest sympathies of birth professionals everywhere, to Dr. Kennell’s wife, children and their families during this time of loss.  The memory of this esteemed doctor will live on in the work we all do to improve the childbirth experiences of women everywhere.  I am grateful that I have the chance to continue in some small way, the legacy of the brilliant contribution that Dr. Kennell made to women and babies worldwide.  Dr. Kennell’s family has requested that in lieu of flowers,  donations be made to DONA International or HealthConnect One. Dr. Kennell’s full obituary can be found here.

Please share  in the comments section, the impact that Dr. Kennell’s work has had on you.  He was very important to all of us.

References

Kennell, J., Klaus, M., McGrath, S., Robertson, S., & Hinkley, C. (1991). Continuous emotional support during labor in a US hospital. JAMA: the journal of the American Medical Association265(17), 2197-2201.

Klaus, M. H., Kennell, J. H., Plumb, N., & Zuehlke, S. (1970). Human maternal behavior at the first contact with her young. Pediatrics46(2), 187-192.

Sosa, R., Kennell, J., Klaus, M., Robertson, S., & Urrutia, J. (1980). The effect of a supportive companion on perinatal problems, length of labor, and mother-infant interaction. New England Journal of Medicine303(11), 597-600.

 

 

He is a featured speaker on this DONA International video. In it, Dr. Kennell

“If a doula were a drug, it would be unethical not to use it.” 1998
The Essential Ingredient: Doula

shares his great respect for the doula’s role in establishing a strong foundation for mothers and babies.

 

Our hearts go out to Dr. Kennell’s family, especially his wife Peggy. The family has asked that in lieu of flowers, donations be made to DONA International or HealthConnect One, which were his passions. Further details about how to make donations in his honor will be available on our website soon.

 

Rest in peace, Dr. Kennell. Thank you for all of the gifts you offered up to the world. Our lives are transformed because of you.

Babies, Breastfeeding, Childbirth Education, Doula Care, Evidence Based Medicine, Healthy Birth Practices, Healthy Care Practices, Infant Attachment, Maternal Quality Improvement, Maternity Care, Newborns, Transforming Maternity Care , , , , , , , , ,