24h-payday

Archive

Archive for the ‘Healthy Birth Practices’ Category

Is Your Favorite in the Top Five? – Science & Sensibility’s Five Most Popular Posts

March 13th, 2014 by avatar

I have been working as Science & Sensibility’s Community Manager for a few weeks shy of two years.  The past two years have been one of great growth for me personally, as I have stretched myself to explore and more clearly understand research related to maternal infant health. I have “labored” to choose topics that are of interest, current and relevant to our readers. I have deeply enjoyed supporting and collaborating with the many gifted writers who have been kind enough to share their wisdom and their words with all of us. I have welcomed and enjoyed the reader comments and shared discussions with many readers, as they made their opinions, thoughts and viewpoints known.  I have learned along with all of you, as readers asked questions of the blog writers and clarified their understanding of topics.  It has, to put it simply, been a fantastic and fun time.

As I reflected on the past two years , I wondered what have been the most popular posts on the blog, since Amy Romano wrote the first post on Science & Sensibility back in Spring of 2009.  I took a look and found some surprises.  I thought it would be interesting to share the top five posts and ask you, the reader – what posts have been your favorites?  The ones you share with students, clients and patients over and over? The ones you most enjoyed reading?

Top Five Posts on Science & Sensibility

#5. Research Review: Facilitating Autonomous Infant Hand Use During Breastfeeding

© Raphael Goetter

© Raphael Goetter

This post reviewed research by Catherine Watson Genna, BS, IBCLC, RLC and Diklah Barak, BOT that demonstrated that babies use their hands at the breast for many purposes, including stabilizing their neck and head for feeding, causing the nipple to become erect and increasing maternal oxytocin which facilitates delivery of milk to the infant.  The research paper included great photographs and links to videos documenting this behavior.  All the more reason to encourage mothers to unswaddle babies prior to feeding to allow them to do what they do best.

 

 

#4. Help New Mothers Breastfeed in Comfort: Nordstrom Converts Any Bra Into A Nursing Bra for a $10 Fee

Creative Commons Photo: Children's Bureau Centennial.  WPA Project 1938

© Children’s Bureau Centennial. WPA Project 1938

This post shared the little known fact that some Nordstrom stores in the USA would convert a woman’s favorite bra into a nursing bra for a small fee.  Many women find it difficult to find a comfortable nursing bra and are sad to need to stop wearing their favorites.  Now they may not have to.  We heard from lots of readers that not all stores offer this service and the price may vary. Updates would be welcome.

 

 

 

 

#3.  Safe Prevention of the Primary Cesarean Delivery: ACOG and SMFM Change the Game

acog wordlThis recent post by Judy Lothian, Phd, RN, LCCE, FACCE, highlighted the newly released ACOG and SMFM Consensus statement discussing 18 points that these organizations stated would help to reduce the number of primary cesareans being performed.  This statement was groundbreaking in its language, suggestions and proposed modifications to current obstetrical practice, backed up by evidence and certainly in line with much of the research behind Lamaze International’s Six Healthy Birth Practices.

 

#2. What Is the Evidence for Induction for Low Amniotic Fluid in a Healthy Pregnancy?

“It is standard of care in the U.S. to induce women with isolated oligohydramnios at term.” Image Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/drewesque/2608674753/sizes/l/in/set-72157605814668384/

© drewesque

This post by Rebecca Dekker, Phd, RN, APRN of Evidence Based Birth was a comprehensive research review looking at outcomes of expectant management vs active management of low amniotic fluid in a healthy term pregnancy, as well as the reliability of the most common methods for assessing amniotic fluid volume.  Lots of great information to help women understand the risks and benefits and determine how they would like to proceed if they are faced with this decision at the end of their pregnancy.

 

 

#1 .  The Red/Purple Line: An Alternate Method For Assessing Cervical Dilation Using Visual Cues

marked purple lineThis post, written by Mindy Cockeram, LCCE is the most popular post ever published on Science & Sensibility.  Mindy reviewed and discussed the research on the the red/purple line that may be seen between the butt cheeks/natal cleft and the changes to this line as cervical dilation changes during labor.  This topic was simply fascinating to readers – and shared widely.  Professionals and consumers sent in pictures and discussed in the comments section their own observations.

 

Are you surprised by the top five posts on Science & Sensibility?  Do you have different favorites?  What else would you like to see covered in the future on this blog?  We welcome your input, your comments, suggestions and are interested in your favorite all time posts!  Share your thoughts and suggestions in our comments section below.

Childbirth Education, Healthy Birth Practices, Lamaze International, Science & Sensibility , , ,

Safe Prevention of the Primary Cesarean Delivery: ACOG and SMFM Change the Game

February 19th, 2014 by avatar

I hope that readers of Science & Sensibility (and anyone working in the field of maternal infant health) are sitting down.  Be prepared to be blown away.  ACOG and SMFM have just released a joint Obstetric Care Consensus statement that has the potential to turn maternity care in the USA on its end.  I feel like this blog post title could be “ACOG and SMFM adopt Lamaze International’s Six Healthy Birth Practices.”  (Okay, that may be a little overenthusiastic!)  I could not be more pleased at the contents of this statement and cannot wait to see some of these new practice guidelines implemented.  Judith Lothian, PhD, RN, LCCE, FACCE summarizes the statement and shares highlights of this stunning announcement. – Sharon Muza, Science & Sensibility Community Manager

Today, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine issued a joint Obstetric Care Consensus statement: Safe Prevention of the Primary Cesarean Delivery. It is being published concurrently in Obstetrics and Gynecology, (the Green Journal).  The ACOG press release is here, with much more detail of the study, not behind a firewall. There is no doubt about it-  this just released statement is a game changer.

acog wordlThe alarming and sustained increase in the cesarean rate in the United States has not improved either maternal or neonatal outcomes. In fact, data suggest that there is increased maternal mortality and morbidity associated with cesarean delivery. This statement describes the myriad of complications associated with cesarean and the increased risks associated with cesarean for mother and baby. The authors suggest that potentially modifiable factors, such as patient preferences and practice variation among hospitals, systems, and health care providers are likely to contribute to the escalating cesarean rates. There is a need to prevent overuse of cesarean, particularly the primary cesarean.

Table 1 acog

source: ACOG

The most common reasons for cesarean include labor dystocia, abnormal or indeterminate fetal heart rate tracing, fetal malpresentation, multiple gestation, and suspected fetal macrosomia. The authors revisited the definition of labor dystocia in light of the fact that labor progresses at a rate that is slower than what we had thought previously. They also reviewed research related to interpretation of fetal heart rate patterns, and access to nonmedical interventions during labor that may reduce cesarean rates. External cephalic version for breech presentation and a trial of labor for women with twin gestations when the first twin is in a cephalic presentation can lower the cesarean rate. The authors analyzed the research using a rubric that rated the quality of the available evidence. The result is a set of guidelines that have the potential to substantially decrease the cesarean rate.

acog logo  These guidelines change the rules of the labor management game.

These are some of the new recommended guidelines:

  • The Consortium on Safe Labor data rather than the Friedman standards should inform labor management. Slow but progressive labor in the first stage of labor should not be an indication for cesarean. With a few exceptions, prolonged latent phase (greater than 20 hours in a first time mother and greater than 14 hours in multiparous women) should not be an indication for cesarean. As long as mother and baby are doing well, cervical dilation of 6 cm should be the threshold for the active phase of labor. Active phase arrest is defined as women at or beyond 6 cm dilatation with ruptured membranes who fail to progress despite 4 hours of adequate uterine activity, or at least 6 hours of oxytocin administration with inadequate uterine activity and no cervical change.
  • Adverse neonatal outcomes have not been associated with the duration of the second stage of labor. The absolute risks of adverse fetal and neonatal outcomes of increasing second stage duration appear to be, at worst, low and incremental. Therefore, at least 2 hours of pushing in a multiparous woman and at least 3 hours of pushing in a first time mother should be allowed. An additional hour of pushing is expected with the use of an epidural, as there is progress.  Interestingly, there is no discussion of position change during second stage, including the upright position, to facilitate rotation and descent of the baby. Also, the authors note that second stage starts at full dilatation rather than when the mother has spontaneous bearing down efforts. Research suggests it is beneficial to consider the start of second stage when spontaneous bearing down by the mother  begins. (Enkin et al, 2000; Goer & Romano, 2013). Using this definition might also decrease the incidence of cesarean.
  • Instrument delivery can reduce the need for cesarean. The authors note concern that many obstetric residents do not feel competent to do a forceps delivery.
  • Recurrent variable decelerations appear to be physiologic response to repetitive compressions of the umbilical cord and are not pathologic. There is an in depth discussion of fetal heart rate patterns and interventions other than cesarean to deal with this clinically. Amnioinfusion for variable fetal heart rate decelerations may safely reduce the rate of cesarean delivery.
  • Neither chorioamnionitis nor its duration should be an indication for cesarean.
  • Induction of labor can increase the risk of cesarean. Before 41 0/7 weeks induction should not be done unless there are maternal or fetal indications. Cervical ripening with induction can decrease the risk of cesarean. An induction should only be considered “a failure” after 24 hours of oxytocin administration and ruptured membranes.
  • Ultrasound done late in pregnancy is associated with an increase in cesareans with no evidence of neonatal benefit. Macrosomia is not an indication for cesarean.
  • Continuous labor support, including support provided by doulas, is one of the most effective ways to decrease the cesarean rate. The authors note that this resource is probably underutilized.
  • Before a vaginal breech birth is considered, women need to be informed that there is an increased risk of perinatal or neonatal mortality and morbidity and provide informed consent for the procedure.
  • Perinatal outcomes for twin gestations in which the first twin is in cephalic presentation are not improved by cesarean delivery (even if the second twin is a noncephalic presentation).

smfm logo

These guidelines offer great promise in lowering the cesarean rate and making labor and birth safer for mothers and babies. They also suggest an emerging respect for and understanding of women’s ability to give birth and a more hands off approach to the management of labor. Women will be allowed to have longer labors. Obstetricians will need to be patient as nature guides the process of birth. Hospitals will have to plan for longer stays in labor and delivery. And women will need to have more confidence in their ability to give birth. Childbirth educators can play a key role here. The prize will be safer birth and healthier mothers and babies.

The authors rightly note that changing local cultures and obstetricians’ attitudes about labor management will be challenging. They also note that tort reform will be necessary if practice is to change. It’s interesting to consider whether standards of practice based on best evidence (as these guidelines are) rather than on fear of malpractice might make tort reform more likely.

The American Academy of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine are to be applauded for their careful research and willingness to make recommendations for labor management based on best evidence. These guidelines provide direction for health care providers and women and will make a difference in not just the cesarean rate but women’s experiences. The game has changed. It is a most welcome change.

What are your first impressions after learning of the elements of this new ACOG/SMFM statement?  What impact do you think these changes will have on the care that women receive during labor and birth?  Are you considering what barriers to change might exist in the hospitals you serve?  How will you share this new information with the families that you work with? As a side note, I found it interesting that this Consensus statement did not suggest using midwives for normal, low risk women.  Research has consistently shown that midwives working with low risk populations can reduce the cesarean rate. – SM

Further press information -

Lamaze International Statement – New Consensus Statement Important Step to Reduce Unnecessary Cesareans

Guidelines to Reduce C-Section Births Urge Waiting

Group Calls for Safe Reduction In Cesareans

ACOG Press Release

References

Enkin, M.,  Keirse, M., Neilson, J., Crowther, C., et al (2000). A Guide to Effective Care in Pregnancy and Childbirth. New York: Oxford Press.

Goer, H. &  Romano, A. (2013). Optimal Care in Childbirth: The Case for a Physiologic Approach.  Seattle: Classic Day Publishing (Chapter 13).

Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Obstetric Care Consensus No. 1. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet. Gynecol. 2014; 123: 693-711.

About Judith Lothian

@ Judith Lothian

@ Judith Lothian

Judith Lothian, PhD, RN, LCCE, FACCE is a nurse and childbirth educator. She is an Associate Professor at the College of Nursing, Seton Hall University and the current Chairperson of the Lamaze Certification Council Governing Body. Judith is also the Associate Editor of the Journal of Perinatal Education and writes a regular column for the journal. Judith is the co-author of The Official Lamaze Guide: Giving Birth with Confidence. Her research focus is planned home birth and her most recent publication is Being Safe: Making the Decision to Have a Planned Home Birth in the US published in the Journal of Clinical Ethics (Fall 2013).

ACOG, Evidence Based Medicine, Guest Posts, Healthcare Reform, Healthy Birth Practices, Maternal Quality Improvement, Medical Interventions, New Research, Practice Guidelines, Uncategorized , , , ,

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 , , , , ,

A Tale of Two Cities from a Childbirth Educator’s Perspective

January 16th, 2014 by avatar

Today on Science & Sensibility, Laurie Levy, LMP, MA, CD(DONA, PALS), CBE, shares her experiences as a childbirth educator and doula recently relocated to a new state.  Her exposures to a new birth culture and method of doing things has taken her breath away, as she settles in to supporting families in her new home.  Learn more about Laurie’s experiences below.  Have you moved around the country and been surprised at the differences in practice you found?  Why do you think there is this difference?  Please discuss with us in the comments section. – Sharon Muza, Community Manager, Science & Sensibilityimage: http://screnews.com/greer/

hospital-signI moved from Seattle to Northern California this past September.  In Seattle, I was privileged to train and teach with leaders in the birth community for many years. Couple this with the 1998 passage of the WA Every Category of Health Care Provider Statute which compelled insurance agencies in WA state to cover licensed midwives and you can see why I would use the word ‘spoiled’ to describe my experience with birth in Seattle.

At a meeting with some of my new colleagues, I joked that I sound like I am saying, “And one time, at band camp…” when I talk about typical Seattle birth practices.  In the seven hospitals in the metro Seattle area, it was common to see moms moving about the halls with telemetry units.  Occasionally you would even see a woman out of bed and moving with an epidural in place. Vaginal exams were limited after the amniotic sac had ruptured. Babies were not routinely separated from their mothers.  The NICU came to the birth room if needed in most cases.  Mothers were encouraged to hand express colostrum to help a baby with unstable blood sugar. Babies were born directly on to their mother’s chest in some cesarean births. Hospitals competed for patient’s maternity care dollar offering ever improving birth suites with each remodel. Tubs, showers, mood lighting and comfortable spaces for partners to rest were expected in birth spaces. VBACs were encouraged. Mother-baby friendly hospitals were the rule not the exception.

Births in my new community

I recently attended my first series of births near my new home and, while these experiences are only a thumbnail of a much bigger picture, I found the differences in environment to be very stark indeed.  In fact, few of the practices I saw lined up with Lamaze International’s Six Healthy Birth Practices.  I am not a Pollyanna. I know that Archie Cochrane awarded obstetrics the “wooden spoon” in 1979 for being the least evidence based medical speciality.  I have talked with nurses from other states who tell stories about mothers being confined to bed after their water breaks for fear of a cord injury or other such superstitious practices. Still I was surprised at what I saw and have been thinking about the challenges that will face me here as I start teaching childbirth education in my new home.

My intent is not to malign any of the practitioners who I met.  In fact, I found that virtually every staff member that I observed wanted the best for their clients and were trying to make the best of a less-than-ideal situation. To protect confidentiality, I have combined information from several births and changed insignificant details, though I have not fictionalized any of the practices.

Healthy Birth Practice 1: Let labor begin on its own & Healthy Birth Practice 4: Avoid interventions that are not medically necessary

My client had some complications and I believe most practitioners would agree that the benefits of an induction outweighed the potential drawbacks. While I have no issue with that, I question why a provider would offer to break a mother’s amniotic sac when she was only 3cm and clearly not in labor.  There was no discussion of possible complications, no discussion that this practice sometimes slows labor or does nothing rather than speeds it up (Smith, et al 2013.)  AROM did nothing to progress my client’s labor and after 9 hours and 5 vaginal exams, she spiked a fever. This led to antibiotics, Tylenol and a spiral of other outcomes that I will address later.

Healthy Birth Practice 2: Walk, move around and change positions throughout labor

My client wanted to move around in labor but was being continuously monitored.  Her window-less room measured 10’ by 8’. She and her family spent a full 24 hours in this room. No one offered a telemetry unit which would allow her greater mobility and when she asked, was told that the L&D floor had one telemetry unit, but the cord to connect the device to the EFM machine was missing. My client requested to shower, and the only shower on the floor was down the hall, none of the rooms had their own.  Showers were also not allowed when Pitocin was being used.

Healthy Birth Practice 3: Bring a loved one, friend or doula for continuous support

I have to say on this point the facility did pretty well. Like most hospitals, they had a practice of only allowing one support person in the room when an epidural is being administered and during cesarean birth.  My client had her epidural reinserted repeatedly.  I was only asked to leave the room once and was allowed into the surgery after much pleading and crying by the mom.

Healthy Birth Practice 5: Avoid giving birth on your back and follow your body’s urges to push

My client was asked to do a “pushing trial” to see if the physician could reduce the anterior lip that seemed to be holding up progress.  She pushed on her back as that was the only position her provider was comfortable with and, as you will see below, she was unable to support herself in other positions.

After 24 hours, we did end up in a room that had its own toilet.  Few other rooms did.  None of the rooms had a tub and clients were not allowed to bring one in.  The standard was communal bathrooms for women in labor, one shower for the entire unit and no refrigerators anywhere to store patient food for use during labor.

It was my client’s intention to hold off on pain medications until after six centimeters (active labor.)  We were creative but a 24 inch movement radius, lack of access to a tub or shower and continuous pitocin led to an epidural earlier than planned. There were some complications with the block and it needed to be replaced several times, and the final medication level was so significant that the mother had absolutely no ability to move her legs on her own at at all.

Healthy Birth Practice 6: Keep mother and baby together – It’s best for mother, baby and breastfeeding

I already gave away the ending – this mother gave birth by cesarean section.  The operating suite was a fairly good size and I was allowed in the operating room as a doula.  Baby was born immediately yelling and pinking up.  Mom got to see her newborn over the blue screen but baby was immediately brought to the warmer.  I heard the pediatrician say “This baby looks so great I am going to leave!” Even with all of that, routine procedure was for baby to be recovered in a separate room.  Staff would give baby all of her injections, weigh and measure her and bathe the baby before returning the baby to mom’s recovery room.  Standard procedure.  Baby was away from her for a full hour before they had any more than a cursory hello.

After the birth, my client asked that I let her family know that she and the baby were healthy.  The extended family seemed very calm when I told them the good news.  They were unconcerned because they had already seen the baby.  I turned around to see into the nursery where one of the grandmothers was cuddling the baby in a rocking chair.  The extended family was holding the baby before the mother.

Thoughts for the future

Upon leaving, the attending physician told my client, “There is no reason for you not to have a vaginal birth next time.  Just not here.”  Apparently, there has been no change in policy about VBACs even with the recent change to the ACOG guidelines (ACOG, 2010).  This hospital has a VBAC ban.

I am not trying to demonize the health care providers or nurses.  I don’t believe that anyone enters maternity work with the idea of oppressing women.  I do believe they were doing the best they could within this system.  This hospital does have plans to address the facility issues but those will take quite some time and hundreds more women will labor and birth before those changes are made.  Probably more important, I wonder how long it will take for a cultural shift even with floor plan improvements.

Jerome Groopman, M.D. in his book How Doctors Think discusses at length how medical providers – and really all of us – make the same errors of logic and repeat them over and over.  So, while I am all for cheerleading and encouraging parents to advocate for themselves, ask for change in the system, understand the evidence for various practices, I also know that most people have a hard time hanging onto their personal power in a medical setting having been socialized to defer (see another Jerome Groopman book, Your Medical Mind) to their provider.

I am much more interested in preparing parents with real world expectations about what practices actually take place in their local birth community. The childbirth classes that I teach here will by necessity be different from what I taught in Seattle. Best practices are just that, but navigating the realities of what is and still having a positive birth experience vary from locale to locale.

To truly prepare parents, it is imperative that I include curriculum about what really makes up informed consent.  Research may tell us one thing, but choice of provider, provider’s preferences and the personal values of the birthing woman all figure into what makes up this slippery thing called “informed consent.” I have found that many expecting parents have never made a health care decision together and have never discussed their values around health care.  Exploring values and how they relate to medical decision making must also be included in childbirth classes to adequately prepare parents. This self-knowledge is not limited to the labor as it will serve parents well as together they navigate future medical decisions for their child.

And finally, parents need concrete tools and classroom practice talking to providers about their wants and desires.  ‘What the brain fires it wires,’ neuroscience tells us. By tools, I mean a concrete list of conversation starters. For example, “I hear what you are suggesting.  I would like to tell you a bit more about where we are coming from.  We would like delayed cord cutting because we value an unrushed separation)” (James, et al, 2012). The role play speaking values and truth in a safe classroom environment can help make parents more likely to actually do this during the stress of prenatal visits and labor ( Arrien, 1993).

I am so grateful that I get to work as both a doula and a childbirth educator.  I gain so much information from each role that helps improve my work when I am wearing the other hat. I know that not every childbirth educator can attend births but I would encourage educators who can, to do so, and also to work in concert with doulas and other childbirth professionals to find out what is really happening in their area.  Additionally, surveying past students to find out if our presented curriculum addressed the real needs of parents as they progressed through labor can help educators to adapt what we teach to meet those needs.

I am confident that the families that I work with both as a childbirth educator and a doula will benefit from my experiences of what is possible and together we can encourage change to practices that are more in line with best practices in obstetrical care.

References

Arrien, A. (1993). The four-fold way: walking the paths of the warrior, teacher, healer, and visionary. New York, NY: Harper.

James, K., Levy, L. (2012, October). Doubters, believers and choices, oh my. Concurrent session presented at the Lamaze International Annual Conference, Nashville, TN.

Smyth RMD, Markham C, Dowswell T. Amniotomy for shortening spontaneous labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 6. Art. No.: CD006167. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006167.pub4.

Vaginal birth after previous cesarean delivery. Practice Bulletin No. 115. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2010;116:450–63.

About Laurie Levy

Laurie LevyLaurie Levy, LMP, MA, CD(DONA), CD(PALS), CBE is a licensed massage practitioner, birth doula and childbirth educator, human anatomy and physiology instructor, and mother of three rambunctious boys.  Laurie has presented at the 2011 Lamaze InternationalConference and hopes to sit for the LCCE exam in 2014.  She can be reached through her website, laurielevy.net

Childbirth Education, Evidence Based Medicine, Guest Posts, Healthy Birth Practices, informed Consent, 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 , , , , , ,