24h-payday

Kathy Morelli Shares Highlights from the 2014 Postpartum Support International Conference

July 15th, 2014 by avatar

Regular contributor Kathy Morelli attended the Postpartum Support International conference in Chapel Hill, North Carolina this past month.  In today’s post, Kathy shares her thoughts, some big take-aways and checks in with the keynote speakers, who share important messages on postpartum mood disorders with our S&S readers.  We all have a responsibility to increase awareness and treatment options for pregnant and postpartum women.- Sharon Muza, Science & Sensibility Community Manager.

PSI QuiltI want to shout from the rooftops that there are so many well-educated, caring and ethical professionals who are focusing on Maternal Mental Health! I was so fortunate to be able to attend this year’s Postpartum Support International 27th Annual Conference at the University of North Carolina (UNC) campus at Chapel Hill on June 18 – June 21, 2014.

PSI’s theme this year was “Creating Connections between Communities: Practitioners and Science: Innovative Care for Perinatal Mental Health.” It was a wonderful meeting where scholar-practitioners in the Perinatal Mental Health field met and exchanged information and best practices in order to hone their collective craft. Researchers, clinicians and identified survivors met and shared their professional and personal stories. PSI’s outgoing president, Leslie Lowell Stoutenburg, RNC, MS, reports that PSI had its largest attendance ever this year.

The keynote speakers were a group of experienced professionals, researchers and clinicians presenting on clinical, scholarly and advocacy topics: Dr. David Rubinow, of UNC Chapel Hill, Dr. Samantha Meltzer-Brody of UNC Chapel Hill, Dr. Marguerite Morgan, of Arbor Circle Early Childhood Services in Grand Rapids, Michigan, Ms. Joy Bruckhard of California’s 20/20 Mom Project, and Dr. Susan Benjamin Feingold, clinical psychologist, all presented about their work in the different aspects in the field of Maternal Mental Health. Advocate Katherine Stone of Postpartum Progress served as emcee at the Saturday night banquet.

Dr. David Rubinow presented on his team research regarding female hormonal fluctuations and the relationship to postpartum mood disorders in sensitive women. Dr. Rubinow is an internationally known expert in the evaluation and treatment of women with mood disorders that occur during periods of hormonal change. Regarding the team’s research, he states “Our data demonstrate that normal changes in reproductive hormones can produce affective disturbance in a susceptible group of women.” The study (Bloch et al, 2000) examined the role of endocrine factors in the etiology of postpartum depression (PPD) by comparing women with a history of PPD and without PPD. Progesterone and estriadiol was measured at baseline, addback, withdrawal, and folIow-up. 67% of the women who had PPD had a recurrence of significant affective symptoms, including a constellation of depressive and hypomanic affect, while none of the control group experienced significant affective symptoms. This indicates that women who suffer from PPD may have a trait vulnerability that isn’t present in women who do not suffer from PPD.

Dr. Susan Benjamin Feingold, the keynote speaker on Saturday evening, presented on her clinical work around the transformational nature of surviving postpartum depression, documented in her newly released book, Happy Endings, New Beginning: Navigating Postpartum Mood Disorders. Dr. Feingold presented inspirational journal entries from women in her clinical practice. She says: “ In my book, I focus on a new view of the postpartum experience and how this difficult time can be a catalyst for change, personal growth and positive transformation. Postpartum depression can be the opportunity for not only healing, but ultimately, it can be a life-changing event.”

Ms. Joy Bruckhard, MBA, of Cigna, presented on her advocacy work in as one of the founders of the Maternal Mental Health Care Collaborative in California called the 20/20 Mom Project. The 20/20 Mom Project is a national campaign and movement for moms and by moms to create specific pathways to treatment for maternal mental health disorders, to address barriers to mental health care. The 20/20 Mom Project has teamed up with Postpartum Support International, a sister non-profit to launch first-of-a-kind web-based training for clinical professionals with the aim of addressing the shortage of mental health and medical professionals who specialize in maternal mental health. Joy says: “I’m so honored to be a part of this important work. Three years ago, my worlds collided: my training through Junior League, my experience in health care working at Cigna and having had two babies myself (and perhaps mild postpartum depression), and some family experience with mental illness, I felt compelled to step up and do more.”

Dr. Samantha Meltzer-Brody, a psychiatrist at UNC Chapel Hill, presented about the ongoing stigma about using psycho-pharmaceuticals during pregnancy and breastfeeding. She expressed frustration that other medications are readily accepted for use during pregnancy, but that there is an ongoing stigma against using medications that treat the mother’s mental health.

Dr. Marguerite Morgan, LCSW, presented on her successful program with African American women at the Arbor Circle Early Childhood Services in Grand Rapids, Michigan. She emphasized that she drops her “PhD-Dr” demeanor and constantly strives to connect at a human level with the people she serves. She is well versed in Christianity and quotes biblical passages about helping oneself during dark times, thus normalizing the experience of depression to her population in an accessible manner.

The psychodynamic approach to perinatal mood disorders was presented by Ms. Lorraine Caputo, LMFT, which addresses the mental health of women across the lifespan. Research and clinical practice indicates that a woman’s previous life experiences can have an impact on her transition to parenthood. On the lifelong care of a woman’s mental health, Ms. Caputo says: “I believe it’s crucial to help women with a history of trauma to make connections between the past and present in a way that psychodynamic treatment is uniquely poised to provide. The perinatal period is a natural time of enormous change, and in the best of circumstances will cause dysregulation, psychological transformation and re-identifications and dis-identifications with one’s own parents. And, given how entirely a pregnant woman and a postpartum mother surrenders her body to her child, childhood sexual traumas in the mother’s past can be triggered by this intense period of physical and emotional bonding with her baby. A psychoanalytic intervention that involves the development of a coherent narrative about how she was parented, and making connections between unrelenting anxiety, ruminations, self blame, and her past history can free a new mother from self doubt, guilt, and fear that she will not be a good mother. This work is done in a carefully paced way, using self reflection and the relationship with the therapist to help the mother feel safe and her powerful feelings contained and held by the therapist.”

Dr. Kelly Brogan, of Womens Holistic Psychiatry, discussed holistic clinical pathways to reproductive mental health.

Of note was the unique reproductive psychiatric sharing session, where reproductive psychiatrists came together to discuss clinical situations which they have encountered. This session was an extension of the collaborative professional LISTSERV that PSI hosts for clinical member reproductive psychiatrists.

Sessions on Healthy Postpartum Relationships were presented by both Ms. Elly Taylor and Ms. Karen Kleiman, LMFT, of the Postpartum Stress Center. Karen Kleiman has recently published her book, Tokens of Affection: Reclaiming Your Marriage after Postpartum Depression, informed from her extensive clinical experience with postpartum couples. Ms. Kleiman presented her overarching framework for treating distressed postpartum couples, identifying 8 tokens to be cultivated in the therapeutic encounter. One of the tokens she refers to as a “Token of Affection.” Ms. Kleiman notes: “Recovery from postpartum depression does not happen overnight, thus, creating a lag between the crisis and a sense of well-being for the couple. During this transitional period both partners are anxious to return to normal while they are simultaneously challenged by buried negative emotions and unmet expectations. Tokens of Affection are gift-giving gestures on behalf of the relationship. As a reparative resource, the Tokens lead the way toward renewed harmony and reconnection.”

Elly Taylor remarks: “It’s common for couples – even happily married ones – to find that the bond between them becomes stretched following the birth of their baby. This comes as a shock for most and increases the risk for perinatal mood disorders for some. But prepare for this, and its possible not only to protect the bond, but build on it as the foundation for family.” She has recently published her book about the postpartum couple’s experience called, Becoming Us, in the United States.

Included here are some closing thoughts from the incoming PSI president, Ann Smith, RN, MSN, CNM:

“PSI is the original and leading organization dealing with perinatal mood disorder which we now know affects approximately 1 in 7 moms. It’s the leading complication of childbearing. All women can be affected regardless of age, race, socioeconomic status and whether the pregnancy was wanted. When treated promptly and by someone who has familiarity with these disorders, moms get better quite quickly. PSI has training programs nationwide which train providers in evidence based treatments. Many women need a combination of medication and talk therapy to get better as quickly as possible. There are a number of medications which have been proven safe for pregnancy and breastfeeding. Support groups are also helpful.

PSI wants everyone to remember three things:

You are not alone, you are not to blame, with help you will be well.

For assistance, call the PSI Warmline at 800-944-4PPD or visit online

References

Bloch, M., Schmidt, P. J., Danaceau, M., Murphy, J., Nieman, L., & Rubinow, D. R. (2000). Effects of gonadal steroids in women with a history of postpartum depression. American Journal of Psychiatry157(6), 924-930.

.

Babies, Birth Trauma, Childbirth Education, Guest Posts, Infant Attachment, Maternal Mental Health, Perinatal Mood Disorders, Postpartum Depression, PTSD, Trauma work , , , , , ,

Evidence on Water Birth Safety – Exclusive Q&A with Rebecca Dekker on her New Research

July 10th, 2014 by avatar

 

Evidence Based Birth , a popular blog written by occasional Science & Sensibility contributor Rebecca Dekker, PhD, RN, APRN, has just today published a new article, “Evidence on Water Birth Safety“ that looks at the current research on the safety of water birth for mothers and newborns.  Rebecca researched and wrote that article in response to the joint Opinion Statement “Immersion in Water During Labor and Delivery” released in March, 2014 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the American Academy of Pediatrics.  I had the opportunity to ask Rebecca some questions about her research into the evidence available on water birth, her thoughts on the Opinion Statement and her conclusions after writing her review. – Sharon Muza, Science & Sensibility Community Manager.

Sharon Muza: First off, is it waterbirth or water birth?

Rebecca Dekker: That’s actually good question! Research experts tend to use the term “waterbirth.” Google prefers “water birth.” So I used both terms in my article to satisfy everyone!

SM: Have you heard or been told of stories of existing water birth programs shutting down or being modified as a result of the recent AAP/ACOG opinion?

RD: Yes, definitely. There was a mother in my state who contacted me this spring because she was 34 weeks pregnant and her hospital decided not to offer waterbirth anymore. She had given birth to her daughter in a waterbirth at the same hospital two years earlier. With her current pregnancy, she had been planning another hospital waterbirth. She had the support of her nurse midwife, the hospital obstetricians, and hospital policy. However, immediately after the release of the ACOG/AAP opinion, the hospital CEO put an immediate stop to waterbirth. This particular mother ended up switching providers at 36 weeks to a home birth midwife. A few weeks ago, she gave birth to her second baby, at home in the water. This mother told me how disheartening it was that an administrator in an office had decided limit her birth options, even though physicians and midwives at the same hospital were supportive of her informed decision to have a waterbirth.

In another hospital in my hometown, they were gearing up to start a waterbirth program this year—it was going to be the first hospital where waterbirth would be available in our city—and it was put on hold because of the ACOG/AAP Opinion.

Then of course, there were a lot of media reports about various hospital systems that suspended their waterbirth programs. One hospital system in particular, in Minnesota, got a lot of media coverage.

SM: Did you attempt to contact ACOG/AAP with questions and if so, did they respond?

RD: Yes. As soon as I realized that the ACOG/AAP Opinion Statement had so many major scientific errors, I contacted ImprovingBirth.org and together we wrote two letters. I wrote a letter regarding the scientific problems with the Opinion Statement, and ImprovingBirth.org wrote a letter asking ACOG/AAP to suspend the statement until further review. The letters were received by the President and President-Elect of ACOG, and they were forwarded to the Practice Committee. We were told that the Practice Committee would review the contents of our letters at their meeting in mid-June, and that was the last update that we have received.

SM: What is the difference between an “Opinion Statement” and other types of policy recommendations or guidelines that these organizations release? Does it carry as much weight as practice bulletins?

RD: That’s an interesting question. At the very top of the Opinion Statement, there are two sentences that read: “This document reflects emerging clinical and scientific advances as of the date issued and is subject to change. The information should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of treatment or procedure to be followed.” But, as you will see, some hospitals do see this statement as dictating an exclusive course of treatment, and others don’t.

I have heard that “opinions” do not carry as much weight as “practice bulletins,” but it really depends on who the audience is and who is listening. In other words, some hospitals may take the Opinion Statement word-for-word and feel that they must follow it to the letter, and other hospitals may ignore it. A lot of it probably depends on the advice of their risk management lawyers.

For example, a nurse midwife at a hospital in Illinois sent me a letter that their risk-management attorneys had put together to advise them on this issue. (She had the attorney’s permission to share the letter with me). These lawyers basically said that when a committee of two highly-respected organizations says that the practice of waterbirth should be considered an experimental procedure, both health care providers and hospitals are “charged with a duty to heed that statement,” unless they find research evidence that waterbirth has benefits for the mother or fetus, and that the evidence can override the Committee’s conclusions.

On the other hand, another risk management lawyer for a large hospital system told me that of course hospitals are not under any obligation to follow an ACOG/AAP Opinion Statement. It’s simply just that—an opinion.

So as to how much weight the Opinion Statement carries—I guess it is really dependent on who is reading it!

SM: How would you suggest a well-designed research study be conducted to examine the efficacy and safety of waterbirth? Or would you say that satisfactory research already exists.

RD: First of all, I want to say that I’m really looking forward to the publication of the American Association of Birth Centers (AABC) data on nearly 4,000 waterbirths that occurred in birth centers in the U.S., to see what kind of methods they used. From what I hear, they had really fantastic outcomes.

And it’s also really exciting that anyone can join the AABC research registry, whether you practice in a hospital, birth center, or at home. The more people who join the registry, the bigger the data set will be for future research and analysis. Visit the AABC PDR website to find out more.

I think it’s pretty clear that a randomized trial would be difficult to do, because we would need at least 2,000 women in the overall sample in order to tell differences in rare outcomes. So instead we need well-designed observational studies.

My dream study on waterbirth would be this: A large, prospective, multi-center registry that follows women who are interested in waterbirth and compares three groups: 1) women who have a waterbirth, 2) women who want a waterbirth and are eligible for a waterbirth but the tub is not available—so they had a conventional land birth, 3) women who labored in water but got out of the tub for the birth. The researchers would measure an extensive list of both maternal and fetal outcomes.

It would also be interesting to do an additional analysis to compare women from group 2 who had an epidural with women from group 1 who had a waterbirth. To my knowledge, only one study has specifically compared women who had waterbirths with women who had epidurals. Since these are two very different forms of pain relief, it would be nice to have a side-by-side comparison to help inform mothers’ decision making.

SM: What was the most surprising finding to you in researching your article on the evidence on water birth safety?

RD: I guess I was most surprised by how poorly the ACOG/AAP literature review was done in their Opinion Statement. During my initial read of it, I instantly recognized multiple scientific problems.

A glance at the references they cited was so surprising to me—when discussing the fetal risks of waterbirth, they referenced a laboratory study of pregnant rats that were randomized to exercise swimming in cold or warm water! There weren’t even any rat waterbirths! It was both hilarious and sad, at the same time! And it’s not like you have to read the entire rat article to figure out that they were talking about pregnant rats—it was right there in their list of references, in the title of the article, “Effect of water temperature on exercise-induced maternal hyperthermia on fetal development in rats.”

These kind of mistakes were very surprising, and incredibly disappointing. I expect a lot higher standards from such important professional organizations. These organizations have a huge influence on the care of women in the U.S., and even around the world, as other countries look to their recommendations for guidance. The fact that they were making a sweeping statement about the availability of a pain relief option during labor, based on an ill-researched and substandard literature review—was very surprising indeed.

SM: What was the most interesting fact you discovered during your research?

RD: With all this talk from ACOG and the AAP about how there are “no maternal benefits,” I was fascinated as I dug into the research to almost immediately find that waterbirth has a strong negative effect on the use of episiotomy during childbirth.

Every single study on this topic has shown that waterbirth drastically reduces and in some cases completely eliminates the use of episiotomy. Many women are eager to avoid episiotomies, and to have intact perineums, and waterbirth is associated with both lower episiotomy rates and higher intact perineum rates. That is a substantial maternal benefit. It’s kind of sad to see leading professional organizations not even give the slightest nod to waterbirth’s ability to keep women’s perineums intact.

In fact, I’m puzzled as to why keeping women’s perineums intact and uncut is not perceived as a benefit by anyone other than the women themselves. And here is the heart of declaring waterbirth as “not having enough benefits” to justify its use: Who decides the benefits? Who decides what a benefit is, if not the person benefitting? Who should be weighing the potential harms and the potential benefits of waterbirth, and making an informed decision about their options? Should it be the mother? Or should it be the obstetrician?

SM: What can families do if they want waterbirth to be an option in their local hospital or birth center and it has been taken away or not even ever been offered before?

RD: That’s a hard question. It’s a big problem.

Basically what it boils down to is this—there are a lot of restraining forces that keep waterbirth from being a pain relief option for many women. But there are also some positive driving forces. According to change theory, if you want to see a behavior change at the healthcare organization level, it is a matter of decreasing the restraining forces, while increasing the driving forces. Debunking the ACOG/AAP Opinion Statement is an important piece of decreasing restraining forces. On the other side, increasing consumer pressure can help drive positive change.

SM: Do you think that consumers will be responding with their health dollars in changing providers and facilities in order to have a waterbirth?

RD: I think that if a hospital offered waterbirth as an option to low-risk women, that this could be a huge marketing tool and would put that hospital at an advantage in their community, especially if the other hospitals did not offer waterbirth.

SM: The ACOG/AAP opinion sounded very reactionary, but to what I am not sure. What do you think are the biggest concerns these organizations have and why was this topic even addressed? Weren’t things sailing along smoothly in the many facilities already offering a water birth option?

RD: I don’t know if you saw the interview with Medscape, but one of the authors of the Opinion Statement suggested that they were partially motivated to come out with this statement because of the increase in home birth, and they perceive that women are having a lot of waterbirths at home.

I also wonder if they are hoping to leverage their influence as the FDA considers regulation of birthing pools. You may remember that in 2012, the FDA temporarily prohibited birthing pools from coming into the U.S. Then the FDA held a big meeting with the different midwifery and physician organizations. At that meeting, AAP and ACOG had a united front against waterbirth. So I guess it’s no surprise for them to come out with a joint opinion statement shortly afterwards.

My sincere hope is that the FDA is able to recognize the seriously flawed methods of the literature review in this Opinion Statement, before they come out with any new regulations.

SM: How should childbirth educators be addressing the topic of waterbirth and waterbirth options in our classes in light of the recent ACOG/AAP Opinion Statement and what you have written about in your research review on the Evidence on Water Birth Safety?

RD: It’s not an easy subject. There are both pros and cons to waterbirth, and it’s important for women to discuss waterbirth with their providers so that they can make an informed decision. At the same time, there are a lot of obstetricians who cannot or will not support waterbirth because of ACOG’s position. So if a woman is really interested in waterbirth, she will need to a) find a supportive care provider, b) find a birth setting that encourages and supports waterbirth.

You can’t really have a waterbirth with an unwilling provider or unwilling facility. Well, let me take that back… you can have an “accidental” waterbirth… but unplanned waterbirths have not been included in the research studies on waterbirth, so the evidence on the safety of waterbirth does not generalize to unplanned waterbirths. Also, you have to ask yourself, is your care provider knowledgeable and capable of facilitating a waterbirth? It might not be safe to try to have an “accidental” waterbirth if your care provider and setting have no idea how to handle one. Do they follow infection control policies? Do they know how to handle a shoulder dystocia in the water?

SM: What kind of response do you think there will be from medical organizations and facilities as well as consumers about your research findings?

RD: I hope that it is positive! I would love to see some media coverage of this issue. I hope that the Evidence Based Birth® article inspires discussion among care providers and women, and among colleagues at medical organizations, about the quality of evidence in guidelines, and their role in providing quality information to help guide informed decision-making.

SM: Based on your research, you conclude that the evidence does not support universal bans on waterbirth. Is there anything you would suggest be done or changed to improve waterbirth outcomes for mothers or babies?

RD: The conclusion that I came to in my article—that waterbirth should not be “banned,” is basically what several other respected organization have already said. The American College of Nurse Midwives, the American Association of Birth Centers, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, and the Royal College of Midwives have all said basically the same thing.

How can we improve waterbirth outcomes? I think continuing to be involved in clinical research studies (such as the AABC registry) is an important way to advance the science and provide evidence on which we can base practice and make more informed decisions with. Also, conducting clinical audits (tracking outcomes) in facilities that provide waterbirth would be important for quality control.

SM: Let’s look into the future. What is next on your plate to write about?

RD: I recently had a writing retreat with several amazing clinicians and researchers who flew from across the country to conduct literature reviews with me. We made an awesome team!! The topics that we have started looking at are: induction for post-dates, induction for ruptured membranes, and evidence-based care for women of advanced maternal age. I can’t decide which one we will publish first! The Evidence Based Birth readers have requested AMA next, but the induction for ruptured membranes article is probably further along than that one. We shall see!!

SM: Is there anything else you would like to share with Science & Sensibility readers on this topic?

RD: Thanks for being so patient with me! I know a lot of people were eagerly awaiting this article, and I wish it could have come out sooner, but these kinds of reviews take a lot of time. Time is my most precious commodity right now!

Has the recent Opinion Statement released by ACOG/AAP impacted birth options in your communities?  Do you discuss this with your clients, students and patients?  What has been the reaction of the families you work with? Let us know below in the comments section! – SM.

ACOG, American Academy of Pediatrics, Babies, Childbirth Education, Evidence Based Medicine, Home Birth, informed Consent, Maternity Care, New Research, Newborns, Research , , , , , , , ,

Happy 100th Birthday, Elisabeth Bing – Lamaze Co-Founder and Visionary Leader

July 8th, 2014 by avatar

By Dr. Mary Jo Podgurski

“If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.”  Sir Isaac Newton, Letter to Robert Hooke, February 5, 1675

The co-founder of Lamaze International (known first as ASPO/Lamaze), Elisabeth Bing, turns 100 years old today.  Elisabeth was a leader and advocate for mothers, babies and families long before this type of advocacy had a name.  Dr. Mary Jo Podgurski, past president of Lamaze International and long time friend and colleague of Elisabeth’s, shares some thoughts on this forward thinking woman who cared enough to take action, become a leader and then create an organization that has helped millions of families over the years achieve a safe and healthy birth.  We salute you Ms. Bing and thank you deeply! – Sharon Muza, Science & Sensibility Community Manager.

Ms. Bing and babyMs. Bing and babyMs. Bing and babyWhen Elisabeth Bing first encountered childbearing women in the London of her twenties, she was a physical therapist with an assignment that sounds alien in 2014. Postpartum women were confined to bed for 10 days, without the ability to even put their feet on the floor! Physical therapists provided exercise and massage. The creativity, drive and passion Elisabeth demonstrated in the 40s and 50s became the foundation for the Lamaze method of childbirth education that is internationally taught and respected today.

Elisabeth’s memoir, My Life In Birth, details her journey from Nazi Germany to America, and provides insight into her many years of service to pregnant women. Giving birth between the 1930s and 1960s meant a woman had few if any choices about the way her baby was born. Mentally disoriented by “twilight sleep” and strapped down for “delivery” lest the sterile field be disrupted, a childbearing woman then was more a vessel for the baby than an active participant. In time women demanded an active role in the birth of their babies. Elisabeth was on the cutting edge of change. With Marjorie Karmel, author of Thank You, Dr. Lamaze, she was a revolutionary with the vision to see a consumer movement poised to create a very real difference in the way women gave birth. Elisabeth was the catalyst for that movement.

1996

1996

When I first spent a weekend with Elisabeth in her New York apartment, she was entering her eighties but was still teaching childbirth education twice a week. Her studio was perfect. Baby pictures were prominently displayed, childbirth posters lined the walls, and the atmosphere was relaxed, comforting and empowering. When asked, Elisabeth explained that pregnant women’s concerns were unchanged. Yes, she told me, the climate in hospitals had changed. Now Lamaze classes were common but medical interventions like epidurals continued to disrupt normal, natural birth. The obstacles were altered but the need for informed choices was ongoing. Women, Elisabeth said, still needed the truth.

Teaching 1978

Teaching 1978

Elisabeth turns 100 today, July 8, 2014. Consider her amazing reach. I am one small piece of her heritage. I’ve been honored to personally learn from this amazing, dynamic mentor for nearly 25 years. Her book, Six Practical Lessons for an Easier Childbirth, was my bible as I approached my first birth in 1976. That baby, my daughter Amy Podgurski Gough, is also a certified Lamaze childbirth educator. Between the joy of my first birthing experience and the births of Amy’s three babies, I’ve been blessed to teach thousands of women and their partners. Like most childbirth educators, I am deeply in Elisabeth’s debt.

Much has been written about Elisabeth’s contribution to childbirth education. A facet of her personality seldom discussed, however, is her insight surrounding collaboration. Her initial work in co-founding ASPO/Lamaze (now Lamaze International) in 1960 created a not-for-profit organization composed of parents, childbirth educators, health care providers and other health professionals. From the start, she discovered the strength of working with a group of people as opposed to standing alone. During the last keynote presentation Elisabeth presented at a Lamaze International national conference, I listened, mesmerized, as she prophetically discussed the need to talk with “insurance companies” as a way to continue her dream of teaching as many women as possible. Her commitment to excellence, to advocacy, and to childbearing women and their partners remains fierce in spite of the passage of time.

1982 ASPO/Lamaze Conference

1982 ASPO/Lamaze Conference

Elisabeth has been called the “mother of childbirth education” and she deserves that title. Her legacy guides all childbirth educators. When I picture her, I envision a physically tiny women with a spirit so powerful one forgets her stature. I look into her clear, bright eyes and see her pure white hair, pulled back into a pony tail with a blue ribbon. I sit in her kitchen sipping tea and drinking in her intelligence. Her cat purrs at our feet. My daughter Lisa is across the table, equally transfixed. I lean in, anxious to remember every moment of this encounter. She smiles, and her eyes light with purpose. I share my personal plans for starting a teen outreach. Elisabeth listens deeply, then offers advice I still adhere to twenty years later.

Elisabeth is an icon, a woman of vision and our true mother. To me she is a dear, precious friend. On July 8th, I will travel to New York City and enter her kitchen again, cognizant of the immense gift Elisabeth’s life has been to all who care about women, birth, and the future. One cannot measure her full worth; I know her wisdom echoes in the mission of every childbirth educator who follows in her footsteps. Thank you, Elisabeth!

© ospreyobserver.com

© ospreyobserver.com

Science & Sensibility and Lamaze International would like to let Elisabeth Bing know what a great organization she created, and how it has impacted so many.  Please leave some wishes for a happy birthday in our comments section and if you wish, share what Lamaze means to you (as an educator, a birth professional, a mother, a father, or a health care provider).  Lamaze International will make sure that every wish is printed and sent on to Elisabeth for her to enjoy!  That will certainly touch her heart!  Please, leave your wishes, stories and memories below. – SM

About Dr. Mary Jo Podgurski

MARY JO PODGURSKIDr. Mary Jo Podgurski is the Director of The Washington Health System Teen Outreach and President and Founder of the Academy for Adolescent Health, Inc. Her undergraduate education is in nursing and education, her master’s work was in counseling, and her doctorate is in education. She began volunteering with pregnant teens in the 70s and has created numerous youth development and education programs using reality-based, interactive educational techniques that are evidence-based and empower youth.

Dr. Podgurski became interested in child abuse prevention as a way to lower teen pregnancy and authored the book Inside Out: Your Body is Amazing Inside and Out and Belongs Only to You, and runs a body-positive, child-centered, interactive, child abuse prevention program.

Dr. Podgurski has presented over 500 workshops locally, nationally and internationally.  She is proud to be an adjunct faculty member in the Education Department of Washington and Jefferson College where she created and teaches the course: Teaching and Dealing with Sexuality in Schools in 2010.

Dr. Podgurski’s certifications include LCCE and FACCE (Fellow in the College of Childbirth Educators) from Lamaze International as a certification as both a sexuality educator and a sexuality counselor from AASECT (American Association of Sexuality Educators, Counselors and Therapists), certification through Parents as Teachers, and certification as a trainer in the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program. She is a past president of the Lamaze International Board of Directors.

Dr. Podgurski has received numerous awards, including the UPMC Dignity and Respect Champion Award in 2011, the Three Rivers Community Foundation Social Justice Award and the Washington County Children and Youth Champion for Children Award in 2009. She was the 2008 Washington County NAACP Human Rights Award recipient and the 2004 Washington County recipient of the Athena Women of Wisdom Award. She was awarded the 2004 NOAPPP (National Organization on Adolescent Pregnancy, Prevention and Parenting, now Healthy Teen Network) Outstanding Professional Award. In May of 2014 she was inducted into the Washington County Historical Society’s Washington County Hall of Fame for her contributions to the community through education of family planning and adolescent health.

Mary Jo and her partner Richard are the parents of three adult children and are blessed with three grandchildren.

Babies, Childbirth Education, Guest Posts, Lamaze International, Lamaze Method, Lamaze News , , , ,

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

July 3rd, 2014 by avatar

By Mindy Cockeram, LCCE

Today’s blog post is a repost of one of the most popular posts ever shared on our blog. It is written by Mindy Cockeram, LCCE.  Mindy explores the “mystical” red/purple line that has been observed to provide information about cervical dilation without the need for a vaginal exam. Have you seen such a line.  Do you have other ways of identifying dilation that do not involve cervical exams?  Please share in the comments- Sharon Muza, Science & Sensibility Community Manager.

When couples in my classes are learning techniques for coping in labor, such as the Sacral Rub (sacrum counterpressure), Double Hip Squeeze and Bladder32 accupressure points,  I always talk about the great position the partner is in for spotting the red, purple or dark line (depending on skin color) that creeps up between the laboring woman’s buttocks and how – by ‘reading’ that line – he or she may be able to assess more accurately the woman’s cervical progress than the health care providers!  This empowering thought is often met with smiles and laughter especially when I translate ‘natal cleft’ into more recognizable words like ‘butt cleavage’.  Strangely, I’ve never had anyone in class mention having heard of this ‘thermometer’ for accessing cervical dilation by sight and I find this interesting considering the number of medical professionals that come through my classes.

Photo CC http://www.flickr.com/photos/alexyra/214829536/

I first came across this body of research as an Antenatal Student Teacher with the National Childbirth Trust in London.  The article I was reading was in Practising Midwife and was a ‘look back’ at the original article (Hobbs, 1998) published in the same magazine.  The original Practising Midwife article was based on a letter referencing a small study by Byrne DL & Edmonds DK published in The Lancet in 1990.

In the 1990 letter to The Lancet, Byrne and Edmonds outlined and graphed 102 observations from eighteen midwifes on 48 laboring women. It states “The red line was seen on 91 (89%) occasions, and was completely absent in five (10.4%) women and initially absent in three (6.25%).”  The report then goes on to talk about the “significant correlation between the station of the fetal head and the red line length.”  Later the authors write: “To our knowledge, this is the first report of this red line.  We believe that it represents a clinical sign which is easy to recognize and which may offer valuable information in obstetric management.”

So how does this line work?  And why does this it appear?  Practising Midwife Magazine presented a graphic which I have attempted to recreate here.  Basically as the baby descends, a red/purplish (or perhaps brown depending on skin color) line creeps up from the anus to the top of the natal cleft in between the bottom cheeks.  When the line reaches the top of the natal cleft, 2nd stage is probably a matter of minutes away.  A line sitting an inch below the natal cleft is probably in transition.  A line just above the anus probably signifies early labor.

Byrne DL & Edmonds DK, the authors of the original study, surmise that the cause of the line is “vasocongestion at the base of the sacrum.” Furthermore, the authors reason that “this congestion possibly occurs because of increasing intrapelvic pressure as the fetal head descends, which would account for the correlation between station of the fetal head and red line length.”  Fascinating and logical!

Interestingly, I came across a 2nd Scottish study from 2010 published by BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth: (Shepherd A, Cheyne H, Kennedy S, McIntosh C, Styles M & Niven C) which aimed to assess the  percentage of women in which a line appeared (76%. ) The study cited only 48-56% accuracy of vaginal examinations to determine cervix diameter and fetal station.  So why aren’t clinicians using this less invasive visual measure – especially considering how much some women may dread vaginal exams in labor??  Wouldn’t the thought of using a methodology to lower infection rate after rupture of membranes has occurred enthuse Health Care Providers instead of using higher risk techniques?  Or how about using the accuracy of the line at the natal cleft to know when a women using epidural should really be coached to push?

My educated guess is that this information has not yet reached Medical Textbooks and non-standard practices can take years to become mainstream (for example. delayed cord clamping) – and then only if or when women request them or media sensation activates them.  In addition, since laboring women are only intermittently attended by Labor & Delivery staff during early and active labor and often encouraged to “stay in bed,” Health Care Providers aren’t necessarily faced with a woman’s buttocks in labor.  Also vaginal examinations are considered “accurate” so staff have no need to peek between a woman’s natal cleft.   However both these studies, paired with the roughly 50% accuracy rate of manual vaginal exams, show that there is potentially a more accurate and less invasive way ahead.

In The Practising Midwife (Jan 2007, Vol 10 no 1, pg 27), Lesley Hobbs writes “Accurate reading would seem to the key to this practice.  I sometimes notice in myself a wish to see the line progressing more quickly than it actually does; when I do this – and check with a vaginal exam – only to find the line is right, I get annoyed with myself and wish I’d trusted my observations.”  Later she goes on to say “I can now envisage a time when I shall feel confident enough to use this as my formal measurement mechanism and abandon intrusive and superfluous vaginal exams.”

Licensed Midwife Karen Baker from Yucaipa, CA commented “The purple line is a curious thing.  It’s definitely not present on everybody but is more prominent on some than others – especially right before pushing.  It tells us when she’s in full swing if we are in a good position to spot it!”

I often urge couples to send me a picture of the so called ‘purple line’ which I promise I will use only for educational purposes but so far a picture is as elusive as the Loch Ness Monster.  So, as I say in class, ‘show me your purple line’!

Are you a midwife, doctor, nurse or doula who has observed this in a client or patient? Partners, have you seen this when your partner was in labor? Has anyone heard of it or witnessed it?  If you are a childbirth educator, do you feel this is something that you might mention in your classes?  Do you think that the families in your classes might be likely to ask for this type of assessment if they knew about it? Please comment and share your experiences.

References

Byrne DL, Edmonds DK. 1990, Clinical method for evaluating progress in first stage labour.Lancet. 1990 Jan 13;335(8681):122.

Downe S, Gyte GML, Dahlen HG, Singata M. Routine vaginal examinations for assessing progress of labour to improve outcomes for women and babies at term (Protocol). Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 9. Art. No.: CD010088. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010088.

Hobbs 1998. Assessing cervical dilatation without Vaginal Exams. Watching the purple line. The Practising Midwife 1(11):34-5.

About Mindy Cockeram

Mindy Cockeram is a Lamaze Certified Childbirth Educator teaching for a large network of hospitals in Southern California.  She has a BA in Communications from Villanova University and qualified as an Antenatal Teacher through the United Kingdom’s National Childbirth Trust (NCT) in 2006.  A native of the Philadelphia area, she spent 20 years in London before relocating to Redlands, CA in 2010.

 

 

 

 

Childbirth Education, Guest Posts, Midwifery, New Research , , , , ,

A Celebration of Midwifery – Supporting Safe, Healthy Birth!

July 1st, 2014 by avatar

In June, midwives were making news all around the world in person and in print.   Maternity care researcher Judith Lothian presented at the International Congress of Midwives conference in Prague, an enormous international gathering of thousands of midwives from all the corners of the globe that occurs every three years. Dr. Lothian shares her impressions of the Congress gathering today.  Additionally, the journal, The Lancet released its Series on Midwifery, long awaited and recognizing that if normal, safe birth is to be supported, midwifery care is the key to achieving that goal.  Dr Lothian summarizes this important series and shares what it means for women and their babies. – Sharon Muza, Community Manager, Science & Sensibility

@ Barbara Harper

@ Barbara Harper

In the US, where midwives attend around 10% of births and around 1% of women have planned out of hospital births, most women and many health care providers know little, if anything, about midwifery. Several decades ago, I began to write about midwifery and out of hospital birth as a way of promoting, protecting and supporting normal birth.  More recently, I’ve done research on women’s and midwives’ experiences of home birth. I’ve also spent a great deal of time with midwives, with my daughters during the births of my grandchildren, at two historic Home Birth Summits, at Normal Birth conferences and, in the last 2 years working with the American College of Nurse Midwives on their Normal Birth Initiative. I count many midwives among my most respected and cherished friends.

I’ve wanted to spread the good news about midwifery and women and babies for a very long time, but the last month has me wanting to ring bells, light candles, and shout from the rooftops to celebrate the tremendous accomplishments of midwives and midwifery, the courage of midwives, and the commitment of midwifery to women and children here in the United States and across the globe.

In early June I attended the International Congress of Midwives in Prague. Thirty eight hundred midwives (and a smaller group of nurses, sociologists, epidemiologists, birth advocates and researchers) came together as they do every three years to share what they know, learn what they don’t know, and recommit themselves to women and babies around the world.  Midwives from 85 countries, most often in the traditional dress of their country, paraded into the opening ceremony. The video and pictures from this event can’t begin to capture what it was like to be there, but it does give you a taste of the excitement and the pride.  It was truly amazing.

ICM.Frances_open

@ Barbara Harper

The number of sessions was mind boggling. In each time slot there were multiple sessions on normal birth. It was difficult to choose and impossible to get to even a small percentage of what was offered. I am sharing some of the standouts for me.

Lisa Kane Low, from the University of Michigan, and a champion of midwifery and evidence based maternity care, was a plenary speaker. Her talk on access to care highlighted the importance of meeting women where they are and putting their needs, not ours, first. Toyin Saraki is the newly appointed ICM Global Goodwill Ambassador. The former First Lady of Nigeria, she is the founder and director of the Wellbeing Foundation Africa. The work of the foundation has reduced maternal mortality in Nigeria by 20%.

Ms. Saraki shared a Nigerian saying with us: If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.  I can’t stop thinking about that, and its implications for our work.  Cecily Begley, the Chair of Nursing and Midwifery at Trinity College Dublin, participated in a plenary panel, Education: The Bridge to Midwifery and Women’s Autonomy. Professor Begley talked about “communities of change” and she described education and research as necessary in crossing the bridge to change. Ray DeVries and Saras Vedam participated in a symposium on ethics related to birth place. Both Ray and Saras contributed to the Journal of Clinical Ethics Fall 2013 special issue on place of birth. The audience participation was lively.

© Barbara Harper

© Barbara Harper

The ethical issues related to pushing women to unassisted births when there is no real choice related to planned, assisted out of hospital birth and the ethical issues of hospitals and providers stonewalling efforts to make transfer seamless, safe, and without recrimination were discussed. Dr. Marianne Nieuwenhuijze from the Netherlands, presented her excellent work on shared decision making. Tanya Tanner from ACNMEllie Daniels from National Association of Certified Professional Midwives, and I presented the collaborative work of ACNM, MANA and NACPM developing a consensus statement on normal, physiologic birth, and more specifically, our work developing a consumer statement based on the consensus statement, Normal, Healthy Childbirth for Women and Families: What You Need to Know.

It was wonderful meeting midwives from Australia, Canada, Ghana, the UK, and Ireland. The challenges are not exactly the same as ours in the US, but we are all fighting uphill battles in support of normal birth.

On the heels of the ICM, The Lancet launched its eagerly awaited Lancet Series on Midwifery.  In Ireland for the summer, I was glued to my computer savoring every moment of the launch online on June 23.    The lead author of each of the four major papers provided a summary and there were comments from a wide array of noted scholars, researchers, practitioners and policy makers from around the world. There were many familiar faces from the International Congress of Midwives. Toyin Saraki gave a stirring speech applauding midwifery, noting that midwifery is not a job, but a passion, a vocation.  Holly Kennedy, who co-authored a paper, and is working on a follow up paper, brought congratulations from the ACNM.

Why did the Lancet do a series on midwifery? Richard Horton, who was involved in the project from the beginning , has this to say in his commentary, The Power of Midwifery:

“Midwifery is commonly misunderstood. The Series of four papers and five Comments we publish today sets out to correct that misunderstanding. One important conclusion is that application of the evidence presented in this Series could avert more than 80% of maternal and newborn deaths including stillbirths. Midwifery therefore has a pivotal, yet widely neglected, part to play in accelerating progress to end preventable mortality of women and children”.  Horton and Astudillo  go on to note that the work is based on a set of values and philosophy that are distinctive. “These values include respect, communication, community knowledge and understanding, and care tailored to a woman’s circumstances and needs. The philosophy is equally important—to optimise the normal biological, psychological, social, and cultural processes of childbirth, reducing the use of interventions to a minimum. “

The four papers include

  • Midwifery and quality care: findings from a new evidence-informed framework for maternal and newborn care by Mary J Renfrew, Alison McFadden, Maria Helena Bastos, James Campbell, Andrew Amos Channon, Ngai Fen Cheung, Deborah Rachel Audebert Delage Silva, Soo Downe, Holly Powell Kennedy, Address Malata, Felicia McCormick, Laura Wick, Eugene Declercq
  • The projected effect of scaling up midwifery by Caroline S E Homer, Ingrid K Friberg, Marcos Augusto Bastos Dias, Petra ten Hoope-Bender, Jane Sandall, Anna Maria Speciale, Linda A Bartlett
  • Country experience with strengthening of health systems and deployment of midwives in countries with high maternal mortality by Wim Van Lerberghe, Zoe Matthews, Endang Achadi, Chiara Ancona, James Campbell, Amos Channon, Luc de Bernis, Vincent De Brouwere, Vincent Fauveau, Helga Fogstad, Marge Koblinsky, Jerker Liljestrand, Abdelhay Mechbal, Susan F Murray, Tung Rathavay, Helen Rehr, Fabienne Richard, Petra ten Hoope-Bender, Sabera Turkmani
  • Improvement of maternal and newborn health through midwifery by Petra ten Hoope-Bender, Luc de Bernis, James Campbell, Soo Downe, Vincent Fauveau, Helga Fogstad, Caroline S E Homer, Holly Powell Kennedy, Zoe Matthews, Alison McFadden, Mary J Renfrew, Wim Van Lerberghe

The Lancet Series on Midwifery makes a major contribution to the literature bringing together the evidence basis for midwifery, its outcomes, and how to affect policy. We need to translate that evidence into action, into the education of the women we teach, and into our advocacy efforts on behalf of safe, healthy birth.

The Lancet Series on  Midwifery can be accessed at through this link. The series includes an executive summary, commentaries, and the four major papers. You need to register on the Lancet site but everything can be accessed for free.

The time has come to recognize and celebrate the incredible work that midwives do. In the US, it is time for women to know about midwifery, and to see the connection of midwifery and normal, physiologic birth.  It is time for childbirth educators to encourage women to choose midwifery care, and time to collaborate with midwives both in our communities and on organizational and governmental levels.  If we want to promote safe, healthy, normal physiologic birth, we need to promote and support midwifery. Healthy low risk women need to know that if they want the safest, healthiest birth for themselves and their babies that they need to find a midwife.

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).

Evidence Based Medicine, Guest Posts, Home Birth, Maternal Quality Improvement, Maternity Care, Midwifery , , , , , , ,