Dear Denise and List:
This study is generating considerable debate here in Seattle both within and
without the midwifery community especially since it was done right here at
the University of Washington (it was all over the local TV news). We were all
expecting the results re augmented and induced VBAC labors (especially with
prostoglandins) but the incidence of rupture in non-induced/augmented labors
being 3.3 times higher than rupture in planned cesarean births is disturbing.
We had all been quoting the incidence of rupture with planned c/s and TOL as
being similar (1.0 - 1.5 %). I haven't read anything but the abstract yet
(from the NEJM) but my school (Seattle Midwifery School) now has a copy of
the entire article. Also there was a discussion here last Monday on Public
Radio with one of the local midwives and an MD on the paper. The midwife who
participated is Audrey Levine, LM and she has previously published in this
area also. There is reportedly an audiotape of the discussion. If anyone is
interested and if I can lay my hands on it I will send a copy on. Take care,
Marilyn
--
This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics.
Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe.
