Science & Sensibility

by Caryn Rogers

May is National Preeclampsia Awareness Month and the Preeclampsia Foundation has been holding Promise Walks all around the country to raise awareness of this disease and generate funds for research.  Caryn Rogers, Senior Science Writer for the Preeclampsia Foundation has provided a research update and information about the etiology of the disease.  The Preeclampsia Foundation is rich in resources for birth professionals and women, including an active forum for mothers dealing with this complication of pregnancy (or postpartum). Lamaze International is a proud web content sponsor of the Promise Walk.- Sharon Muza, Science & Sensibility Community Manager

The Preeclampsia Foundation would like to thank Lamaze International and Science & Sensibility for this opportunity to present a research overview during National Preeclampsia Awareness Month. Preeclampsia, which means “before the lightning” in Greek, is a leading cause of maternal and neonatal mortality and morbidity worldwide. The syndrome probably got the name from its tendency to strike suddenly, out of nowhere. One in ten women develops gestational hypertension during her first pregnancy, while about one in twenty develops preeclampsia. The latter condition has historically been poorly understood, but new research has led to a deeper understanding of preeclampsia. Some of the new research has been supported with Preeclampsia Foundation Vision Grants over the last ten years.

What is Preeclampsia

Preeclampsia is a multifactorial, heterogeneous pregnancy syndrome diagnosed after the appearance of both hypertension and proteinuria (protein in the urine) any time after mid-pregnancy. Its cause is still unknown. Though called the “disease of theories,” research is closing in on triggers of the disorder, which will help to design specific treatments. Certain women have predisposing factors such as the presence of other diseases that make preeclampsia more likely. There may be specific genetic factors. While the disease’s primary symptoms are hypertension and proteinuria, many other organ systems may be involved, especially the liver, brain, and platelets. Symptom presentation is unpredictable, with some cases appearing to fulminate within hours and other cases remaining mild for weeks. Finally, some preeclamptics progress to a convulsive phase – the disease known as eclampsia.

How is Preeclampsia diagnosed

Two blood pressure readings, taken at least six hours apart, of 140/90 mm Hg or greater, and the excretion of 300 mg or more of proteinuria in a 24-hour urine sample are the primary diagnostic requirements. Currently, many clinics are measuring the ratio of protein to creatinine in a single urine sample, using a value that predicts the total will be 300 mg or more in a day. In some instances, the disease is diagnosed without proteinuria when preeclampsia-specific signs and symptoms of other organ system involvement occur.

Signs and Symptoms of Preeclampsia No Symptoms Hypertension Proteinuria Edema (Swelling) Sudden Weight Gain Nausea or Vomiting Abdominal (stomach area) and/or Shoulder Pain Lower back pain Headache Changes in Vision Hyperreflexia Racing pulse, mental confusion, heightened sense of anxiety, shortness of breath or chest pain, sense of impending doom  adapted from Preeclampsia Foundation

What are the risk factors for Preeclampsia

Risk factors for preeclampsia include: first pregnancy, previous history of preeclampsia, multiple gestation, preexisting hypertension, diabetes, kidney disease, or organ transplant, obesity, age over 40 or under 18 years, maternal family history of preeclampsia.  Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS); Antiphospholipid Antibody Syndrome (APS), lupus or other autoimmune disorders; and use of any Assisted Reproductive Therapy (ART).

Much of what is included in standard prenatal care was developed primarily to detect preeclampsia. This is why blood pressure and urine protein are checked at every visit and why visits come more closely together as the end of pregnancy approaches. The careful attention of care providers to these potentially invisible symptoms, and their communication of worrisome signs and symptoms to patients, has saved countless lives. Women who have been educated to know the signs and symptoms are able to practice the Preeclampsia Foundation’s motto, “Know The Symptoms. Trust Yourself.” 75% of those who knew the risks were able to take life-saving action when symptoms developed, versus 6% of those who did not know the signs and symptoms.

Pathophysiology

Placentas from preeclamptic pregnancies are characteristically shallowly implanted. During differentiation, the blastocyst will divide into an internal set of cells (the embryoblast), and an outer layer that will become the placenta (the trophoblast). When the blastocyst embeds into the decidua, the trophoblast remodels the uterine spiral arteries that supply blood to the endometrium. This remodeling activity persists into the second trimester of pregnancy. In normal pregnancies, this remodeling produces arteries that deliver appropriate blood flow to the placenta; in preeclamptic pregnancies the remodeling process is flawed.

Trophoblastic cells enter the spiral arteries and induce apoptosis, which is the initiation of cell death in the endothelial cells lining the walls of the arteries. Once the cells have died, the trophoblastic cells convert into an endothelial form and adhere to the walls of the vessels. These cells ignore maternal signaling to contract the vessel, which is why, in a normal pregnancy, these arteries are relaxed at all times, bathing the placenta in oxygen and nutrients. In preeclamptic placentas, the remodeling does not extend as far as normal, impeding appropriate nutrition and oxygenation.

One theory is that shallowly implanted placentas may not be able to transfer the total of oxygen and nutrients the fetus requires to develop ideally. The flow of blood through the spiral arteries is affected by their smaller size. Several genetic mechanisms that can cause shallow implantation have been identified with more likely to be discovered as investigation into trophoblastic cells continues. (Colucci, 2011; van Dijk, 2010)

Once fetal growth accelerates in the later trimesters of pregnancy,  the fetal demand for more oxygen than the placenta is capable of ferrying eventually leads to placental hypoxia. Hypoxia triggers the placental release of a protein called soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase (sFlt-1.) SFlt-1 binds to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and a placentally derived factor that mimics it, placental growth factor (PlGF), rendering both unavailable to the receptors they usually target. SFlt-1 levels are measurably elevated in pregnant women who go on to develop preeclampsia. (Levine 2006; Maynard 2003)

In the vasculature, VEGF shepherds repair molecules along the walls of the blood vessels, plugging the holes that appear with normal wear and tear. When free VEGF is bound by sFlt-1, it cannot do this repair work.  Because the rate at which the repair slows depends on the amount of sFlt-1 that the placenta is producing and also on the amount of VEGF a woman’s body naturally produces, the symptoms that follow this damage vary widely. The effect of reduced levels of free VEGF and PlGF is that the vasculature is unable to achieve normal vasodilation and resists signals to contract or dilate appropriately.

Another circulating antiangiogenic factor is soluble endoglin, or sEng, which binds to and disrupts the normal functioning of TGF-beta, a protein that controls proliferation, cell differentiation and other functions in most cells.. Thus sEng, too, has also been identified as a culprit in preeclampsia. Although its mechanisms are not as clearly understood as those of sFlt-1, it’s been empirically confirmed that women who develop preeclampsia at term have increasing serum levels of sEng beginning as early as gestational week 25. There are also suggestions that women are more likely to develop the dangerous variant of preeclampsia known as HELLP syndrome (Hemolysis, Elevated Liver enzymes, Low Platelets) if their levels of sEng are highly elevated relative to their sFlt-1 levels, and that they are more likely to develop severe preeclampsia when sFlt-1 levels are high relative to sEng. (Baumwell, 2007)

Depending on individual underlying susceptibilities and the ratios of antiangiogenic factors, a pregnant woman can develop the following symptoms at any rate and in any order, combination, and degree of severity, starting after midgestation and continuing for up to six weeks postpartum: hypertension, proteinuria, sudden weight gain and swelling, nausea, vomiting, upper right quadrant abdominal pain, shoulder pain that feels like a pinched nerve along the bra strap (referred from the liver), lower back pain, headache, visual disturbances, hyperreflexia, racing pulse, mental confusion, heightened sense of anxiety, shortness of breath or chest pain, sense of impending doom, abruption, IUGR, fetal distress, thrombocytopenia, either very low or conversely a large increase in urine output, seizure, pulmonary edema, liver rupture, abruption, and death.

The multi-organ nature of the syndrome means that a woman can feel fine, have hypertension and proteinuria that becomes apparent after testing, and then be admitted to the hospital with failing kidneys, liver and other organs. Or she can have a headache and begin seizing with comparatively low blood pressure and only mild proteinuria. The various presentations of preeclampsia make it challenging to consistently diagnose and manage appropriately.

The blood pressure increase indicates vascular damage that compromises the mother’s health and damages the spiral arteries which connect the placenta to the woman’s body. Women with preeclampsia also have a dysregulated metabolic response to pregnancy. (von Versen-Hoeynck, 2007)  Gestational diabetes is a risk factor for preeclampsia, and women with PE are more likely to have elevated cholesterol readings and alterations in many serum biomarkers. Placental debris from an enhanced inflammatory immune response is thought to sweep into the maternal bloodstream and trigger these metabolic responses. (Redman, 2012) Researchers are newly aware of this signaling mechanism and further research is in progress.

Treatment and Prevention

As of May 2013, the only definitive treatment for preeclampsia is delivery of the placenta. These pregnancies, whether or not they are initially low-risk, are medically complicated and are generally managed by OB-GYNS, sometimes in consult with maternal-fetal medicine specialists. Timing of delivery is one of the only tools available to manage and balance the competing interests of worsening maternal disease, a failing placenta, and a potentially premature baby. Patients are managed with close monitoring, anti-hypertensives as necessary, and sometimes steroid shots to accelerate fetal lung maturation, depending on gestational age. In severe cases, this monitoring occurs while the woman is hospitalized in a tertiary care center. Magnesium sulfate may be given to reduce the risk of seizure. In severe disease, delivery sometimes must take place regardless of gestational age to best protect both lives (even a very preterm baby can be better out than in when the placenta is failing and the mother’s liver is threatened) and is seriously considered in cases of severe preeclampsia for any worsening of symptoms after 34 weeks.

The HYPITAT trial has led to a new ACOG recommendation, to be released later this year, that any gestational hypertension (readings above 140/90 mm Hg) be induced at 37 weeks gestation. (Koopmans, 2009) The data show equally good outcomes for the neonate in either arm of the trial, and substantially reduced maternal risk of severe hypertension. 

Calcium supplementation to prevent preeclampsia has been evaluated in large randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and found to have no benefit except perhaps in populations with very low dietary intake. Antioxidant supplementation – specifically vitamins C and E, also evaluated in large RCTs, has shown no benefit. Supplemental baby aspirin showed no benefit or harm in two large RCTs, but meta-analysis showed a potential benefit to an as-yet-unidentified high-risk population when begun in the first trimester. The older therapies of dietary salt restriction, diuretics, and bed rest have not been shown to have benefits and may cause harm so are not recommended.

Risk of Cardiovascular Disease

In addition to being at higher risk of preeclampsia in any subsequent pregnancies, women with a history of preeclampsia are at roughly double the risk of developing heart disease or stroke over the five to fifteen years following delivery. Many women develop chronic hypertension postpartum. There are risk factors common to both preeclampsia and heart disease, and there is also evidence that preeclampsia can cause damage to the heart. 

Lifestyle changes are known to lower risk of heart disease, so women with a history are recommended to stop smoking (or never start), eat a heart-healthy diet, get regular exercise, and maintain a normal BMI. Because preeclampsia unmasks a higher risk, proactively consulting her physician and preferentially a general internist or cardiologist to discuss heart health postpartum can also help to monitor for the chance that heart disease will develop.

Lowering the Risk

Although there are no known therapies at this point, there are ways to reduce the risk of preeclampsia to mother and baby. Pre-conception or inter-conception care is gaining increasing value as women can be assessed and counseled to begin a pregnancy in the best possible health. Regular prenatal care, with close monitoring of symptoms, will detect the onset of hypertension in many women. For those whose disease progresses rapidly between appointments, knowledge of the signs and symptoms of the condition is the best protection. To this end, the Preeclampsia Foundation provides evidence-based patient education materials to care providers and encourages women to contact their care providers to report any headache, nausea, elevation in hypertension, changes in swelling or urine output, visual disturbances (like sparkles and flashing lights,) and pain in the upper right of the abdomen or along the bra strap. Being informed and closely monitored saves lives.

References and Recommended Reading

Baumwell, S., & Karumanchi, S. A. (2007). Pre-eclampsia: clinical manifestations and molecular mechanisms. Nephron Clinical Practice, 106(2), c72-c81.

Colucci, F., Boulenouar, S., Kieckbusch, J., & Moffett, A. (2011). How does variability of immune system genes affect placentation?. Placenta, 32(8), 539-545.

Garovic, V. D., Bailey, K. R., Boerwinkle, E., Hunt, S. C., Weder, A. B., Curb, D., … & Turner, S. T. (2010). Hypertension in pregnancy as a risk factor for cardiovascular disease later in life. Journal of hypertension, 28(4), 826.

Koopmans CM, Bijlenga D, Groen H, Vijgen SM, Aarnoudse JG, Bekedam DJ, van den Berg PP, de Boer K, Burggraaff JM, Bloemenkamp KW, Drogtrop AP, Franx A, de Groot CJ, Huisjes AJ, Kwee A, van Loon AJ, Lub A, Papatsonis DN, van der Post JA, Roumen FJ, Scheepers HC, Willekes C, Mol BW, van Pampus MG; HYPITAT study group. (2009) Induction of labour versus expectant monitoring for gestational hypertension or mild pre-eclampsia after 36 weeks’ gestation (HYPITAT): a multicentre, open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 374(9694):979-88

Levine, R. J., Lam, C., Qian, C., Yu, K. F., Maynard, S. E., Sachs, B. P., … & Karumanchi, S. A. (2006). Soluble endoglin and other circulating antiangiogenic factors in preeclampsia. New England Journal of Medicine, 355(10), 992-1005.

Maynard, S. E., Min, J. Y., Merchan, J., Lim, K. H., Li, J., Mondal, S., … & Karumanchi, S. A. (2003). Excess placental soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase 1 (sFlt1) may contribute to endothelial dysfunction, hypertension, and proteinuria in preeclampsia. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 111(5), 649-658.

Powers RW, Jeyabalan A, Clifton RG, Van Dorsten P, Hauth JC, et al. (2010) Soluble fms-Like Tyrosine Kinase 1 (sFlt1), Endoglin and Placental Growth Factor (PlGF) in Preeclampsia among High Risk Pregnancies. PLoS ONE 5(10): e13263. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0013263

Redman, C. W. G., Tannetta, D. S., Dragovic, R. A., Gardiner, C., Southcombe, J. H., Collett, G. P., & Sargent, I. L. (2012). Review: Does size matter? Placental debris and the pathophysiology of pre-eclampsia. Placenta,33, S48-S54.

Turner, J. A. (2010). Diagnosis and management of pre-eclampsia: an update.International journal of women’s health, 2, 327.

van Dijk, M., & Oudejans, C. (2010). Stox1: key player in trophoblast dysfunction underlying early onset preeclampsia with growth retardation.Journal of pregnancy, 2011.

von Versen-Hoeynck, F. M., & Powers, R. W. (2007). Maternal-fetal metabolism in normal pregnancy and preeclampsia. Front Biosci, 12, 2457-2470. 

Warning, J. C., McCracken, S. A., & Morris, J. M. (2011). A balancing act: mechanisms by which the fetus avoids rejection by the maternal immune system. Reproduction, 141(6), 715-724.

World Health Organization. (2011). WHO recommendations for prevention and treatment of pre-eclampsia and eclampsia. Geneve: WHO.

About Caryn Rogers

A native of Tempe, Arizona, Ms. Rogers is a graduate of Arizona State University. A freelance science writer and editor for medical nonprofits, she has been the senior science writer for the Preeclampsia Foundation since 2006. She lives with her family in Mt. Lebanon, PA, where she also plays the violin. Ms. Rogers can be contacted through the Preeclampsia Foundation or via email

 

 

 

Sharon Muza Childbirth Education, Evidence Based Medicine, Maternity Care, New Research, News about Pregnancy, Pregnancy Complications, Research, Uncategorized Caryn Rogers, eclampsia, gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, Preeclampsia Foundation, research, Sharon Muza, tests in pregnancy, treatment for pre-eclampsia

Childbirth Connection’s Listening to Mothers Initiative just released the Listening to Mothers III (LTMIII) results late last week.  For the third time in the past 11 years, this organization has gone out and queried women on a variety of topics related to pregnancy, birth, postpartum and breastfeeding.  They have questioned thousands of women to accurately assess how the actual experiences hold up against what we know to be best practice and evidence based maternity care. I have relied on the past two survey results frequently during my professional career in maternal health and am thrilled to have the new survey results now available.

I thought it would be interesting to run some of the LTMIII results through the filter of Lamaze International’s Healthy Birth Practices.  The Healthy Birth Practices were most recently updated by Lamaze in 2009, and consist of six simple, evidence based practices that greatly contribute to keeping birth safe and healthy for mothers and babies. Each easy to remember practice has its own short video that parents can watch that talks about that specific care practice and safe alternatives.  Additionally, each Healthy Birth Practice has an accompanying Practice Paper with all the citations for the peer-reviewed, gold standard research that supports that particular practice.

Some useful links and information upfront

Listening to Mothers I

Listening to Mothers II

New!  Listening to Mothers III

Survey Questionnaire 

Major Study Findings

Interesting facts before we get started

While the LTMIII survey only looked at 2400 women,  please be aware that one percentage point change in results would represent approximately 40,000 mother/baby pairs, based on a US birth rate of around 4 million births a year.

35% of women had not intended to be pregnant at the time of this pregnancy, including 5% who stated that they had never intended to become pregnant at all.

52% of those planning to get pregnant did have a preconception meeting with a health care provider, (which could be viewed as a wonderful time to determine if this health care provider might be a good match for their maternity care needs.)

85% of women based their maternity care provider on insurance requirements or restrictions.

78% of women worked with an obstetrician (this has dropped over the course of the three studies.)

9% of women worked with a family practice doctor

8% of women worked with a midwife who practiced in a hospital, as one of the requirements of the study was that the mother was having a hospital birth.

The average length of time spent actually in a prenatal appointment, with health care provider or their nurse was 32 minutes.  (OB: 31 min, Family Practice/MW 35 min.) I was pleasantly surprised that it was this long, I expected less.

Over the course of the three studies, the cesarean rate of study participants went up, (24% to 31%), the VBAC rate went down and labor augmentation was cut in half from 53% to 26%.  More women used nitrous oxide for pain relief during their labor in the most recent study (6%, up from 2% in the first study)

30% of the women chose not to ask a question that they wanted answered at least once during their prenatal appointments.

Overall, women were unable to make choices in line with the Healthy Birth Practices, and did not know that deviating from these practices was not evidence based and resulted in increased interventions.

Let’s see how things stack up

Healthy Birth Practice 1: Let Labor Begin on Its Own

Research shows that in the absence of medical issues, mothers, babies and labors do best when labor starts spontaneously on its own. The final few weeks of pregnancy are vital for the putting the “finishing touches” on baby and helping to make the transition to life on the outside as smooth as possible.

41% of all women surveyed attempted a medical (involved a care provider) induction and of those induced, 74% were successful, (the woman went into labor) for an overall medically induced labor rate of 31%

Reasons why women were induced

• 44% were full term
• 19% wanted to get the pregnancy over
• 11% wanted to control the timing of birth
• 16% were induced for a large baby (note: the average weight of these babies induced for suspected macrosomia was 7 lbs 15 ounces.)
• 18% were induced for being “overdue” (note: the average gestational age of those babies induced for being overdue was 39.9 weeks)
• 18% were induced for a maternal health problem

Interestingly, 26% of women had their due date changed toward the end of their pregnancy; 66% of those were given an earlier due date and 34% were given a later one.

68% of women had a late third trimester ultrasound to estimate fetal weight

Healthy Birth Practice 2: Walk, Move Around and Change Positions in Labor

Women with the ability to move and change positions are able to use this movement to help cope with the pain of labor.  Access to water in the form of a shower or tub can be a valuable coping technique.  Having access to intermittent fetal monitoring or telemetry movements can facilitate movement and promote labor progress for many women.

Only 43% of women walked around after being admitted to the hospital in labor

40% of women used position changes and movement for non-pharmacological pain relief

Healthy Birth Practice 3: Bring a Loved One, Friend or Doula for Continuous Support

Many women will thrive in labor if surrounded by a caring, supportive birth team.  Adding a skilled birth doula to the team has been shown in many studies to improve the outcome of birth and reduce interventions and cesareans.  While more and more birthing women are aware of a doula, many are still not having one in attendance at their birth.

99% of mothers had at least one support person present, (most often this was a partner, then a family member or friend)

6% women used a doula

75% of mothers were aware of what a doula does and of those 75% who knew, 27% would have liked a doula supporting them at their birth.

Healthy Birth Practice 4: Avoid Interventions That are Not Medically Necessary 

Although research shows that routine and unnecessary interference in the natural process of labor and birth is not likely to be beneficial—and may indeed be harmful—most U.S. births today are intervention-intensive.

98% of the women had at least one ultrasound during pregnancy and 70% had three or more over the course of their pregnancy

68% of women had a late third trimester ultrasound to estimate fetal weight.

83% of women had some type of pain medication

67% had an epidural or spinal, and 92% of those who did reported this to be “very helpful” or “somewhat helpful.”

62% of women surveyed had an IV during labor

51% of women had one or more vaginal exams in labor. (I was surprised at this, I would have suspected higher)

47% had bladder (Foley) catheters

31% of women had a labor augmented with pitocin

50% of birthing women had their labor either induced or augmented with pitocin

20% had their membranes ruptured artificially (AROM)  after labor began

36% of women had their labor started or augmented by AROM

1% of women requested and had a maternal request cesarean for non-medical reasons

40% of women drank fluids during their labor

21% of the women ate during labor

85% of women birthing vaginally did so without forceps or vacuum

87% of women responding had at least one of the five big interventions (attempted labor induction, epidural, pitocin augmentation, assisted delivery with vacuum or forceps or cesarean.

60% of the women had at least two of the above five interventions listed above

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

Women push most effectively when permitted to push in the positions that feel best for them.  Allowing the baby to “labor down” even after reaching full dilation until moms feel the urge to push can help women to push a baby out quicker and under their own steam.  Pushing in positions that allow the pelvis to open as much as possible and making space by getting the sacrum out of the way can help promote descent during pushing.

68% of women surveyed birthed on their backs

23% birthed in a semi-sitting position

8% gave birth in a position off their back, either side-lying, squat or hands & knees

Healthy Birth Practice 6: Keep Mother and Baby Together; Its Best for Mother, Baby and Breastfeeding

Experts now recommend that right after birth, a healthy newborn should be placed skin-to-skin on the mother’s abdomen or chest and should be dried and covered with warm blankets. Any care that needs to be done immediately after birth can be done with your baby skin-to-skin on your chest.  This early time together promotes breastfeeding, helps stabilize the newborn’s temperature and blood sugar and also offers a unique chance for high levels of natural oxytocin that promote bonding and help with immediate postpartum bleeding.

47% of mothers responding had their baby in their arms within the first hour

40% of mother-baby pairs were not skin to skin when they were first held

33% of all babies were with hospital staff the first hour

60% of mother-baby pairs roomed in together

18% of babies spent time in the NICU

25% of babies spent their days with mom and their nights in the nursery

49% of mothers who stated that they intended to exclusively breastfeed were given formula samples or offers.

29% of newborns were supplemented with water or formula during the hospital stay

Summary

After reading through the LTMIII report, I found myself discouraged by the current results.  It was clear that women were making choices and/or being informed by their care providers to choose practices that have long been known to create a cascade of interventions, do not improve outcomes for mothers or babies and are not evidence based.  For the majority of the women who responded to this survey, the Healthy Care Practices are still a pipe dream and not a reality in their hospitals and with their current providers.  I know change comes slowly, and it can take years for protocols to catch up with the evidence but frankly, after reading the summary of how things did or did not change over the course of the three studies I was still shocked.

Have you had a chance to go through the study yet?  What were your thoughts?  Anything surprise you?  Can you share a bright point that you noticed?

Join us later this week as I examine what the LTMIII survey had to say about childbirth education and how women are receiving pregnancy and birth information and from where.

 

 

 

 

Sharon Muza Breastfeeding, Cesarean Birth, Childbirth Education, Doula Care, Epidural Analgesia, Evidence Based Medicine, Healthy Birth Practices, Healthy Care Practices, Lamaze International, Maternal Quality Improvement, Maternity Care, Medical Interventions, Midwifery, New Research, Newborns, News about Pregnancy, Research, Transforming Maternity Care, Uncategorized Childbirth Connection, Healthy Birth Practices, Lamaze International, Listening to Mothers III, Listening to Mothers surveys, research, Sharon Muza

Childbirth Connection has just released the Listening to Mothers III study today, and will holding a press conference shortly to share the results.  I plan to listen in and read the study thoroughly to see what the mothers have to say!  Look for a complete post early next week evaluating the current state of pregnancy care, labor, birth postpartum and breastfeeding and how it stacks up to Lamaze International’s Six Healthy Birth Practices.  In the meantime, consider joining the press conference, or reading this new study.  You can also check out the previous two LTM studies to see if things have changed.

Listening to Mothers I

Listening to Mothers II

New!  Listening to Mothers III

Sharon Muza Babies, Cesarean Birth, Childbirth Education, Depression, Healthcare Reform, Healthy Birth Practices, Healthy Care Practices, informed Consent, Maternal Quality Improvement, Maternity Care, Medical Interventions, New Research, Research Childbirth Connection, Healthy Birth Practices, Healthy Care Practices, lamaze, Listening to Mothers, research, Sharon Muza

With Mother’s Day coming this Sunday, many women will be enjoying their first Mother’s Day celebration.  Hopefully, all mothers will be pampered, celebrated, honored and cherished.  For many women, finding a balance of being the mother and taking care of yourself and meeting your individual needs is often a struggle.  Walker Karraa takes a look at a recent study examining the importance of self care for new mothers and asks how birth professionals can stress the importance of new mothers making time for themselves as they transition to their new role. – Sharon Muza, Science & Sensibility Community Manager

_________________________

 

I have a confession. One year I volunteered over 2,000 hours at my children’s school. Yes, I was one of those moms. From wearing an orange vest directing carpool in the morning, to planting the garden with the green team, Xeroxing homework packets for the teachers, and planning the Spring Auction, I chose to put everything into public displays of affection for motherhood. Selflessness was superior parenting.

Fast forward a few years and I am rounding the corner on my PhD.  I am now one of those moms. I barely know the name of the Principal, miss school functions regularly, never volunteer in the class, and avoid direct eye contact with anyone on the PTA at all cost. I am caring for myself in ways that don’t directly involve caring for my children. Many would perceive it as selfish, or at a minimum, I am recognized as not being “an involved parent”.  I feel the judgment from other parents.

I would imagine anyone reading this right now understands the mine field of guilt, disappointment, and distress we walk through regarding balance between self-care and caring for children. Childbirth professionals often find themselves torn between the demand for caring for clients and the need for self-care.

A paradox for women lies between the need for self-care and the social construct of selflessness as superior in parenting.  Moreover, socio economic stressors regarding childcare and ongoing employment bear critical weight on time and resources for women to engage in self-care in addition to caring for their infant, other children, and family. Women need and deserve physical, intellectual, mental, emotional and spiritual health and well-being—yet engaging in self-care is a social construct that views it as selfish, or a luxury. And dare I say we engage in keeping this paradigm alive by extoling the virtues of some women who display self-sacrifice and dishing about the deviance of others who are not at the PTA meeting. We compare ourselves to both, often rejecting the parts of ourselves that are in desperate need of time, privacy, exercise, prayer, creativity, recovery. For that matter we could all use a nap, a shower, and time to do with as we want, desire, or dream.

New Study Emerges

This push and pull of visions of perfect martyrdom with the need for self-care is at no other time more present than new motherhood.  A recent qualitative study, “The Role of Maternal Self-care in New Motherhood” by Barkin and Wisner (2013) explored women’s perceptions of the role of maternal self-care in postpartum period and the barriers to employing self-care. Critical to postpartum wellness are increasing understandings of the mechanisms of self-care and their importance in the lives of new mothers. In a qualitative study of three focus groups consisting of 31 new mothers (had given birth during the year prior to enrolling in the study), Barkin & Wisner (2013) examined the relationship of 1) women’s perceptions of self-care, 2) how women applied self-care in new motherhood, and 3) the barriers to practicing self-care.

Semi-structured interviews with three focus groups elicited responses regarding the responsibilities associated with new motherhood, changes experienced since the birth of their child, feelings in response to those changes, describing constructs of a ‘good mom’, and the circumstances surrounding their high functioning and low functioning periods.

Transcripts related to maternal functioning were extracted and grouped into one of three categories: (1) women’s valuations of the role of self-care in new motherhood, (2) applications of self-care and (3) barriers to practicing effective self-care.

Barkin & Wisner (2013) noted two conflicting themes where women were both aware of the importance of self-care while holding the belief that good parenting is tantamount to selflessness. Participants described knowing that even the most basic self-care such as good nutrition and rest were of paramount importance, however they experienced barriers to engaging in self-care for themselves. One participant described the dilemma in this way,

“Because I really didn’t pay attention to myself. Like my main focus was on him. Making sure he was eating every hour. And as far as me, when a counselor came in and she was like, ‘Well, are you eating breakfast?’ ‘Are you eating lunch?’ And you really have to stop and look back and think like okay, yes, I need to take care of myself as well as the baby’. But you don’t really think about that until someone brings it to your attention.” (Barkin & Wisner, 2013, p. 5)

Participants described breastfeeding as a source of conflict.  Barkin and Wisner (2013) reported,

There was also substantial discussion of maternal self-care in relation to breastfeeding. For a portion of the women, breastfeeding was physically and mentally uncomfortable. The women described guilty feelings associated with deciding to artificial milk-feed their child. Despite the guilt, some of the mothers made the ultimate determination to transition to formula feeding. This was recognized as an act of self-care. (p. 5)

Conversely, where selflessness was seen as synonymous with motherhood, some participants reported what the authors called “potentially unhealthy degrees of selflessness” (Barkin & Wisner, 2013, p. 5) such as neglecting their hygiene or refusing to let trusted family members care for the baby.

Barriers

While some engaged in self-care shared examples of taking time to exercise, delegating infant care to partner, taking showers, applying cosmetics, socializing with friends, and dining out—many women reported barriers to self-care. Lack of time, limited financial resources, and one’s own inability to set boundaries were reported as significant barriers to self-care.

Implications for Childbirth Educators and Doulas

In addition to a call for more research, the authors concluded:

The development of a behavioral intervention aimed at improved self-care practice among new mothers is the long-term goal of this research. Interventions should be tailored to the mother’s individual circumstances and preferences. Self-care strategies that are both attractive and feasible for the individual woman will be more effective. Additionally, the availability of such an intervention will enable health-care providers to make better recommendations to women who are struggling to care for themselves and their infant concurrently. (Barkin & Wisner, 2013, p. 6)

This is where we share!

How do you cover the topic of self-care in your childbirth education classes, or prenatal sessions?

What do you consider some good examples of feasible and attractive self-care strategies that you suggest to your clients?

What have you learned about self-care strategies from your clients?

What are your thoughts regarding the causes of this paradox between self-care and selflessness?

As we educate our next generations of families to navigate the waters of parenting, how might we offer support, education and support for women to not only practice self-care, but prioritize it?

References

Barkin, J. L., & Wisner, K., L. (2013). The role of maternal self-care in new motherhood. Midwifery, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2102.10.001

Walker Karraa Babies, Guest Posts, Infant Attachment, Maternal Mental Health, New Research, Newborns, Parenting an Infant, Research Childbirth Education, guest posts, infants, Mother's Day, postpartum, research, self-care, Walker Karraa

Occasional Science & Sensibility contributor Rebecca Dekker of Evidence Based Birth has spent the last month writing a blog article about Group B Strep and it is finally here! In her painstaking but clear review of the evidence on GBS in pregnancy, Rebecca came to the conclusion that universal screening and treatment for GBS is more effective than treating with antibiotics based on risk factors alone. She also found that although “probiotics, chlorhexadine, and garlic have the potential to reduce vaginal and newborn colonization with GBS, we do not have evidence yet to show that these strategies can prevent early GBS infections, since GBS infection usually occurs when GBS gains access to the amniotic fluid and gets into the fetus’s lungs during labor.”

To read Rebecca’s just released article, Group B Strep in Pregnancy: Evidence for Antibiotics and Alternatives in its entirety, click here.

Today, Rebecca joins us on Science & Sensibility to talk about her latest addition to Evidence Based Birth.

Sharon Muza: What inspired you to write this article?

Rebecca Dekker: I received more requests to write about Group B strep than any other topic! Over the past few months, I had weekly, sometimes daily emails and Facebook messages from women—all asking me to provide them with evidence about antibiotics, hibiclens, or garlic for preventing GBS infections. After about the 50th request, I figured I better set aside my other plans and focus on this topic, because it was clearly weighing heavily on many women’s minds! 

SM: What was the most difficult thing about writing this article?

RD: Probably the most difficult thing was sorting through the stacks and stacks of research articles that have been published about Group B strep in pregnancy. This was one of the reasons it took me almost a year of blogging before I decided to dive into group B strep. I knew it would be a monumental task. And it was. But I was fortunate enough to have an expert in GBS who helped point me to the most important or “landmark” studies.

SM: Who was this expert?

RD: I met Dr. Jessica Illuzzi via email earlier this year. She and I had corresponded about a different blog article, and at that time I found her to be incredibly helpful. I knew that in addition to being an OB, Dr. Illuzzi was a research expert in GBS. So I asked her if she would review my article for me. To be honest, I could not have written this article without her guidance. She read my first draft and basically told me that I needed to go back to the drawing board. She encouraged me to dig deeper into the evidence so that I would really understand it. Whenever I had questions about something, she sent me research articles that immediately answered my question. In the end, I knew the article was ready when she said it was a great summary of the state of the science of GBS. 

I was also lucky enough to have 2 other GBS experts give me feedback on the article—a GBS researcher and a microbiologist. And then I have several physicians who faithfully review all of my articles and give great suggestions. I am very grateful to all of them as well!

SM: I know that you usually begin your articles with an exploration of your own biases, in order to tease the bias out of your writing. Did you have any pre-existing biases about GBS? 

RD: To be honest, I actually had no biases up front. I was fortunate to always test negative for GBS myself, and so I never had to struggle with this issue before. I was pretty open-minded to the entire issue. I was open-minded to antibiotics. I was open-minded to hibiclens or other alternatives. I had no personal agenda. I simply wanted to get to the facts. Hopefully this lack of bias will shine through and help people respect the article even more.

 SM: What surprised you most as you wrote this article?

RD: One of the things that surprised me was how people have such different reactions when they read the evidence about GBS. I had several friends preview the article for me. Some of them instantly said, “Oh yeah, that sounds like a really high risk. I’d definitely take the antibiotics to prevent an infection in my newborn.” Others would say, “Really? That’s all? That’s not a very high risk at all. I wouldn’t take antibiotics for that level of risk.” This is a great example of how everyone perceives risk differently. But at least in this article I have been able to put some evidence-based facts out there. Let people interpret the risks as they may. I only ask that they talk with their health care provider before making any decisions!!

 SM: What do you think is the future of GBS evidence?

RD: Ten years from now I am guessing that I could write a very different article. I would like to think that by then we may have a vaccine on the horizon that could prevent both early GBS infections and GBS-related preterm birth. It would also be nice if the rapid test was affordable and widely available by then. I would also LOVE to see some solid research evidence on the use of probiotics for decreasing GBS colonization rates in pregnant women. As far as I know, probiotics for decreasing GBS hasn’t been studied yet in pregnant women, and I think it deserves further inquiry.  

SM:What makes your blog article about GBS different than all the other blog articles out there on this topic?

RD: I purposefully didn’t look at any of the other GBS blog articles out there until I finished my article. Yesterday, I read through a variety of blog articles (there are a lot!). Most of them were about 90-95% accurate in their facts. A couple of them had serious errors (in particular, I found one blog article that had inaccurate information about hibiclens). Most didn’t list any references, and I could tell that most of the blog authors had used secondary sources (other blogs or summary articles) instead of looking at the research evidence themselves. This can be fine, but sometimes it’s a bit like playing telephone: You just keep repeating the same facts over and over without checking to see if the evidence has changed or if the summary you are parroting was accurate in the first place. I’d like to think that my blog article is a very accurate assessment of the research evidence on GBS in pregnancy—translated into regular language so that women and their family members can understand the evidence. 

SM: What are you going to write about next?

RD: I don’t know!! What would YOU like to see me write about?

SM: I want to thank you Rebecca, for your contributions to Science & Sensibility and for sharing Evidence Based Birth with the world!  I know that these articles take a huge amount of time and you are very diligent and conscientious about researching the literature and providing only the best analysis possible,  and seeking out experts on the topic to help you really be sure that you are offering the best of the best of information.  I always enjoy reading your blog and find it a great source of information for my doula and CBE students and my birth doula clients as well. I know that I speak for all the readers here on Science & Sensibility when I say, keep on keeping on!  Do please let Rebecca know what you would like her to write about next!   

Sharon Muza ACOG, American Academy of Pediatrics, Babies, Childbirth Education, Evidence Based Medicine, Guest Posts, informed Consent, Maternity Care, Medical Interventions, New Research, Newborns, NICU, Push for Your Baby, Research antibiotics, Evidence Based Birth, GBS, group B strep, guest post, informed Consent, newborns, prenatal testing, Rebecca Dekker, research, Sharon Muza, tests in pregnancy