Is this really the new head obst at KEMH? mm

> Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2003;
> 43: 261 Editorial comment
The current relentless drive for 'evidence-based care' in medicine has
> aims which must be applauded. However, the consequences are not always
> beneficial to all, with a clear tendency, at time, for the 'evidence' to
> be applied inappropriately. 
> Two manuscripts in this issue address the increasingly difficult
> subject of breech presentation. 1, 2 The 'Term Breech' 3 study did show
> that Caesarean section birth is associated with a higher likelihood of a
> quality outcome for singleton term babies than vaginal breech birth. The
> short-term maternal outcomes reported appeared to show that the
> increased use of Caesarean section was not to the detriment of the
> mothers. 
> However, it did not examine longer term issues arising from
> Caesarean section, such as puerperal depression after discharge from
> hospital, future changes in fertility, and increasing morbidity and
> mortality in subsequent pregnancies. Equally, it did not (and could not)
> examine the consequences of the study being applied to other breech
> situations, such as multiple birth and preterm breech birth, and the
> effect upon the training and experience of obstetricians who will,
> inevitably, be faced with clinical situations such as the unexpected
> rapidly progressing vaginal breech birth and the woman who exercises her
> autonomous right to make and informed decision to attempt a term vaginal
> breech birth. 
> Kaushik and Gudgeon 2 rightly remind us tat, if we are to follow
> 'the evidence' and advise all women with breech presentations that
> Caesarean section is the preferred mode of delivery, we have a
> responsibility to temper this advice with explanation of alternatives,
> including external cephalic version where appropriate. By implication,
> methods of training obstetricians in the techniques of vaginal breech
> birth must be found, to replace the experiential model used in the past.
> 
> 
> Michael HUMPHREY
> MB BS, PhD, FRANZCOG, FRCOG
> References
> 
> 1 Phipps H, Roberts CL, Nassar N,  Raynes-Greenow CH,  Peat B,  Hutton
> EK.  The management of breech pregnancies in Australia and New Zealand.
> Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol. 2003; 43: 294-297.
> 
> 2 Kaushik V, Gudgeon G.  Caesarean for breech: A paradigm shift?  Aust
> NZ J Obstet Gynaecol. 2003; 43: 298-301.
> 
> 3 Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hewson SA, Hodnett ED. Saigon S, Willan AR.
> Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech at
> term; a randomised multi-centre trial. Term Breech Trial Collaborative
> Group. Lancet. 2000; 356: 1375-1383.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ************************************************************************
> ***********
> This email, including any attachments sent with it, is confidential and
> for the sole use of the intended recipients(s).  This confidentiality is
> not waived or lost, if you receive it and you are not the intended
> recipient(s), or if it is transmitted/received in error.
> 
> Any unauthorised use, alteration, disclosure, distribution or review of
> this email is prohibited.  It may be subject to a statutory duty of
> confidentiality if it relates to health service matters.
> 
> If you are not the intended recipients(s), or if you have received this
> e-mail in error, you are asked to immediately notify the sender by
> telephone or by return e-mail.  You should also delete this e-mail
> message and destroy any hard copies produced.
> ************************************************************************
> ***********
> 
> 
> --
> This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics.
> Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe.
> 
> --
> This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics.
> Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe.
> 
> 

--
This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics.
Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe.

Reply via email to