Our director has made his decision on a risk assessment model of care. Litigation being the prime reason. Hence nothing to do with evidence based practice or clinical need. Grrrr... Don't you hate because if you go against the establishment policy/protocol and something happened you wont be supported by the hospital lawyers. Let there be a national insurance scheme like NZ ACC. Then we can all practise evidenced based care. Cheers Barb
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of mh Sent: Saturday, 18 September 2004 5:18 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] admission ctg Marilyn- Unfortunately, being enlightened in one area of practice doesn't guarantee enlightenment in others. This was his (very commendable) idiosyncracy; in other ways he was dismissive of others' points of view, paternalistic, inclined to do the opposite of whatever was suggested... it was a happy day for us to see a change of directors. I guess no one is all bad... or all good. We thought no one could be worse, to work with, I mean, but his successor, while easier to get along with, doesn't seem to have the same fire for reducing intervention. Oh well. The grass is always greener- Monica ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marilyn Kleidon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 11:23 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] admission ctg > Monica: I think your Director needs to do a nationwide lecture tour on > both > admission ctg's and vbac. > > marilyn > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "mh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, September 17, 2004 4:22 AM > Subject: [ozmidwifery] admission ctg > > >> I work in a high risk 'Delivery Suite' in a tertiary hospital where >> we > have >> frequent antenatal transfers for reasons of our own level 3 nursery. >> Also, >> because of our proximity to the state's primary Children's hospital we > have >> antenatal transfers of care so women whose babies have particularly >> bad abnormalities which can be treated surgically can have their >> babies as > close >> to this facility as possible. So our clientele is heavily skewed >> towards high risk pregnancies and extremely anxious mothers and >> partners. The decision was made, however, many years ago, to forgo >> routine admission traces in the Delivery Suite. There has to be a >> particular reason for > doing >> a ctg trace on admission and they are audited frequently. I hold no >> brief for our long time director of Delivery Suite (now replaced) but >> one thing > he >> consistently did was to try to limit the use of *routine* ctgs and >> also >> to >> push (very aggressively) VBAC in our hospital, so that we have a 70% > success >> rate. It was sold to the other O&G's that admission traces, per se, >> increased the likelihood of a C/S by I forget the rate, ?40%. We are >> so conservative in other areas of practice I had thought this must be >> the > norm >> everywhere- is it not? How many places do routine admission traces? I > would >> be very interested to see a cross section >> Monica >> >> >> -- >> 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. -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit <http://www.acegraphics.com.au> to subscribe or unsubscribe.
