Katrina
On 11/07/2005, at 9:47 PM, Dean & Jo wrote:
<x-tad-smaller>Here is the abstract for the study but you might have to get further details regarding the things I mentioned.</x-tad-smaller>
<x-tad-smaller>Cheers Jo</x-tad-smaller>
Caesarean Section Does Not Reduce Risk of Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
<unknown.gif>
ADELAIDE, Australia (Reuters Health) Dec 01 - Caesarean section only marginally reduces the risk of pelvic floor dysfunction after delivery compared with vaginal delivery, according to the results of an Australian study.
The research team, from Adelaide University, defined pelvic floor dysfunction as any type of incontinence, symptoms of prolapse, or previous pelvic floor surgery.
Lead researcher Dr. Alastair MacLennan and colleagues surveyed 3010 adults aged 15 to 97 years, who did not reside in an institution, and found that while 46.2% of women had current or past pelvic floor dysfunction, only 11.1% of men did.
Of particular note, the authors say, was the prevalence of pelvic floor dysfunction in women when differing modes of delivery were compared. Nulliparity resulted in a 12.4% prevalence of pelvic floor dysfunction, followed by caesarean section (43%), spontaneous vaginal delivery (58%), and instrumental delivery (64%).
The team also found that when spontaneous vaginal delivery and/or instrumental delivery were compared with caesarean section, only urge incontinence was associated with a significantly higher prevalence following vaginal delivery. The data are reported in the December issue of the British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology.
In an interview with Reuters Health, Dr. MacLennan pointed out that "there is a new phenomenon in the last 10 years, of women wanting caesarean section to prevent future troubles, but 80% of the problems a woman having a vaginal delivery has, also happen to a women having a caesarean section."
He concluded that "women who have had children are four to five times more likely to be incontinent than a virgin female, and 10 times more likely than a male. We hadn't realised the incidence was so high."
Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2000;107:1460-1470.
<x-tad-smaller> </x-tad-smaller>
<x-tad-smaller> </x-tad-smaller>
<x-tad-smaller>-----Original Message-----</x-tad-smaller>
<x-tad-smaller>From:</x-tad-smaller><x-tad-smaller> [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] </x-tad-smaller><x-tad-smaller>On Behalf Of </x-tad-smaller><x-tad-smaller>Ceri & Katrina</x-tad-smaller>
<x-tad-smaller>Sent:</x-tad-smaller><x-tad-smaller> Monday, July 11, 2005 5:34 PM</x-tad-smaller>
<x-tad-smaller>To:</x-tad-smaller><x-tad-smaller> [email protected]</x-tad-smaller>
<x-tad-smaller>Subject:</x-tad-smaller><x-tad-smaller> [ozmidwifery] Message for Jo Pelvic Floor Research - Archive Question</x-tad-smaller>
Hi Jo
just postimg an email here, not sure if you got my offlist one.
Katrina
Hi Jo
I was going through the archives this morning and came across an old post of yours that you posted relating to the CS and Tracy Curro on 60 minutes...
You said " an Australian study has shown that lack of pelvic floor exercises and pregnancy hormones affect the function of the pelvic floor and CS birth can do nothing to prevent it. "
Do you have the reference for this article? I am looking for research on this very topic for a speech for uni....
Thanks
Katrina
www.niagaraparkshow.com.au
<x-tad-smaller>--</x-tad-smaller>
<x-tad-smaller> No virus found in this incoming message.</x-tad-smaller>
<x-tad-smaller> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.</x-tad-smaller>
<x-tad-smaller> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/45 - Release Date: 7/9/2005</x-tad-smaller>
<x-tad-smaller>--</x-tad-smaller>
<x-tad-smaller> No virus found in this outgoing message.</x-tad-smaller>
<x-tad-smaller> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.</x-tad-smaller>
<x-tad-smaller> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/45 - Release Date: 7/9/2005</x-tad-smaller>
