Treatment Of Pregnant Women : The Caesarean Section

It is easy to see that the medical abilities and tools we had 50 years ago are nothing in comparison to what we have today. Among these advances has been the extent to which we can prevent illness and disability. Fetal surgery first emerged in the 1980’s by Dr Michael Harrison aka “the father of fetal surgery,” when he decided to look into ways doctors could fix certain defects before birth to avoid their inevitable, devastating consequences. It has since expanded its practice to a number of hospitals across the country, although it is still an uncommon procedure. It involves opening up the mother 's uterus (just as a doctor would during a caesarean section) so that the fetus is exposed as much as needed to be operated on. The fetus is then put back and the uterus is closed until it is time for the mother to go into labor. The fetus is never detached from the mother and is essentially being operated on while inside the womb (Smajdor). While it may seem like a positive life changing procedure, there are many perspectives out there that support

The writer explained there could be no concern for fetal or maternal health during the delivery although some obstetricians tended to induce labor in all diabetic mothers to protect babies and mothers. Moreover, labor progress was supposedly assessed by old-fashioned methods, which resulted in performing unnecessary obstetrical practices. Intervention was imposed in cases of inaccurately labeled slow or abnormal labors and failures to progress. It is common practice that a primary cesarean generally produces subsequent surgical deliveries. The author realized that cesareans were performed because of insufficient data on laboring women’s

Randomization was used to generate what patient went to which group. The way the patients were chosen eliminated bias because “Randomization was performed according to a computer-generated list by means of sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes which revealed the allocation of the subject to either induction or expectant management”(Nielsen et al. p. 60). This secure randomization added a great strength to the study. The sample size seemed fairly large, 226 patients were split into 116 for elective induction and 110 to expectant management, although the power analysis was disclosed in this study and determined that 600 patients were required. Only 226 patients were used and because it would take 4 years to reach the required amount of patients, the study was discontinued. This was both a strength and weakness because disclosing this information made the study more honest but the quota needed to reach the best answers was not attained. The study for the 226 patients was pretty standard with the 80% power and alpha at 0.05. T-test and chi square tests were used to compare the proportions between the groups of people. The women were chosen based on the inclusion criteria of being 39 weeks gestation or older, maternal age of more than 17, fetal cephalic presentation, singleton gestation, a candidate for vaginal delivery, and a Bishop score of 5 or greater in nulliparous women and 4 or greater for multiparous women. This inclusion criterion was a concern because both nulliparous women and multiparous women were being tested together. This was a weakness because the labor patterns of a nulliparous woman compared to a multiparous woman are very variable and sure to distort study data. It was also disclosed how gestational age was achieved which included the crown rump test measured in 6-12

In many cases, a patient increases their odds of a cesarean section if they chose to be induced without causation. A study was conducted between the years of 1999 to 2000 with 3215 nulliparous women. The findings of this study showed that nulliparous women are at a significantly higher risk of needing a cesarean section if they were electively induced (Luthy et al., 2004). Multiple studies have looked at nulliparous versus multiparous women and have found that elective inductions do not look to increase the odds of a woman needing a cesarean section in multiparous women. Researchers have begun to look at other possible relationships between patients who undergo an elective induction that results in a caesarean section and they have found

The intent of this paper is to examine effective solutions for reducing cesarean deliveries. Cesarean deliveries involve more risk to both the mother and baby than vaginal births do. Cesarean deliveries have a higher potential of complications than vaginal births. Cesarean deliveries cost more, require longer hospital stays, and require more resources—both human and systemic—than vaginal births.

Over the years birthing methods have changed a great deal. When technology wasn’t so advanced there was only one method of giving birth, vaginally non-medicated. However, in today’s society there are now more than one method of giving birth. In fact, there are three methods: Non-medicated vaginal delivery, medicated vaginal delivery and cesarean delivery, also known as c-section. In the cesarean delivery there is not much to prepare for before the operation, except maybe the procedure of the operation. A few things that will be discussed are: the process of cesarean delivery, reasons for this birthing method and a few reasons for why this birthing method is used. Also a question that many women have is whether or not they can vaginally

Due to cesarean section, it is proven that c-section birth causes infants to be at greater risk of developing a host of illnesses such as, asthma, type 1 diabetes, as they progress and grow older; As Australia has one of the highest c-section rates in the world with now at 32% of the population having a cesarean birth (s. McCulloch, 2018). Indigenous mothers are more likely to experience more long-term issues and even perinatal death compared to the 0.7% of non-aboriginal and non-Torres Strait islander mothers (The Department of Health, 2011).

Vaginal birth is not a easy trip for a baby. These days the death rate in U.S. for full-term babies is 2 in 1000. According to some experts a C-section during the week the woman is due would save lives.

Caesarean Delivery upon request it is defined as a primary pre-labor delivery on the request of the mother in the absence of any maternal or fetal indications. Risks that are potential with a maternal requested delivery will explain that hospital stay is longer, increased risk with respiratory issues with mother and infant, and greater complications for the maternal with other pregnancies. Those complications can include rupture of the uterus, implantation problems with next pregnancy and the need for hysterectomy due to complications of prior caesarean. Potential benefits from a planned caesarean can include decrease in complications from birth, decrease in the risk of hemorrhage and transfusions from blood lost. Fewer complications from surgery and the fetal outcome from respiratory complications is decreased. According to The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists "The belief that the absence of maternal and fetal indications for caesarean delivery, a planned delivery is safe and appropriate and should be recommended to patients, delivery should not be performed before a gestational age of 39 weeks". (2013). The ability of maternal requested should not be available or recommended unless there is complication or effective pain management. This is also not recommended for maternal that want to have more children. The risks outweighs the benefits of maternal

A C-Section, or Cesarean Section, is a major surgery to deliver a baby who may suffer from complications or could be breech. They may also be done in response to the mother and the complications that she may have. It is done by cutting through the wall of the mother’s abdomen. It can be life threatening to the mother and the baby. It can raise the risk to the mother and could even complicate future pregnancies. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologist suggest offering the opportunity to pursue a VBAC. An evidence review in 2003 found that overall VBAC success rates were greater than fifty percent (Ebelle 1192-4). This study shows that the success rate of VBACs are improving each year.

7. Cesarean section are restoratively shown in only 15 percent of births. Despite the fact that it is safe, it builds difficulties after birth and decreases breast-feeding. There is a concern toward the delicate life of a baby that requires long-term, and excessive supervision.

Cesarean section occurs through an incision in the abdominal wall and uterus rather than through the vagina. Women are suffering from various health complexities after the cesarean section. There are many kinds of health complexities like infection, hemorrhage or increased blood loss, injury to organs, adhesions, extended hospital stay, extended recovery time, reactions to medications, risk of additional surgeries, maternal mortality and so on. Among my 12 cesarean respondents 3 were suffered from infection, 2 were suffered from increased blood loss, 1 from injury to organs, 4 from weakness and 2 from extended recovery time. Among my 8 normal delivery respondents 2 were suffered from weakness and 1 from

Maternal conditions that determine the path of birth, the maternal age and the reduction in the number of desired children. The gestational age less than 38 weeks of gestation or greater than 40 weeks can increase the chance of having a cesarean birth. Births in gestational ages between 29 and 36 weeks have a probability close to 57% of occurring by cesarean section, compared to 33 % in births with a gestational age between 37 and 42 weeks. Women have a greater proportion of births by cesarean section (43.3%) compared with women who have a history of a previous child (34.9%), or two or more children (27.5%). Among women of middle and high socioeconomic level, there is a strong preference for the surgical delivery, it has been determined

Perhaps one of the most important and difficult decisions an obstetrics care provider attending births in a hospital setting can make is when to admit women to labor and delivery units. A literature review evaluating the PICO question: “In nulliparous women with singleton, vertex pregnancies, does admission to labor and delivery units in active labor, defined as cervical dilation of 4 cm or more and regular uterine contractions compared to admission in early labor, defined as cervical dilation less then 4 cm and irregular uterine contractions, reduce the incidence of primary cesarean section,” supplied sufficient evidence to support admission to labor and delivery units in active labor. Neal, et al., and Bailit, et al., used similar methods to evaluate the outcomes of low-risk women admitted in early labor versus active labor. They both reported that low-risk women admitted to labor and delivery units in early labor were more than twice as likely to have a cesarean section. They also reported that this group was more likely to have increased interventions. In a third, older study, McNiven et al., (1998), conducted one of the only randomized controlled trials to evaluate admission to labor and delivery units in

Vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) is the name used for identifying the method of giving birth vaginally after previously delivering at least one baby through a caesarean section (CS). A trial of labour (TOL) is the term used to describe the process of attempting a VBAC. An elected repeat caesarean (ERC) is the other option for women who have had a caesarean in the past. The rates of women choosing to deliver by means of an ERC has been increasing in many countries, this is typically due to the common assumption that there are too many risks for the baby and mother (Knight, Gurol-Urganci, Van Der Meulen, Mahmood, Richmond, Dougall, & Cromwell, 2013). The success rate of VBAC lies in the range of 56 - 80%, a reasonably high success rate, however, the repeat caesarean birth rate has increased to 83% in Australia (Knight et al., 2013). It is essential to inform women of the contraindications, success criteria, risks, benefits, information on uterine rupture and the role of the midwife in relation to considering attempting a VBAC (Hayman, 2014). This information forms the basis of an antenatal class (Appendix 1) that provides the necessary information to women who are considering attempting a VBAC and can therefore enable them to make their own decision regarding the mode of birth.