RE: [ozmidwifery] Article about increased respiratory distress and LUSCS

[Megan & Larry]

That is so sad, don't change the c/s rate, just do it later or better still use a drug to give a better outcome.   Megan From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Helen and Graham Sent: Sunday, 16 October 2005 8:55 PM To: ozmidwifery Subject: [ozmidwifery] Article about increased respiratory distress and LUSCS http://www.abc.net.au/health/minutes/stories/s1480474.htm   Caesarian section and respiratory distress 12 October 2005  Caesarian section rates in countries like Australia are soaring. Once maybe one in 10 babies were born by section whereas these days it can be as high as one in two. There are various questionable reasons for this, one being the baby’s safety. The reality for the baby though, is that being born by caesarean section is unnatural and there’s a higher rate of respiratory distress. It’s thought that it’s maybe because the baby doesn’t experience the stress of labour (mind you nor does the mother). Anyway, a UK group has done a trial involving mothers at term – in other words 37 weeks or more - giving them steroids just before an elective caesarean section to see whether as with pre-term babies, steroids might prevent respiratory problems. They found that steroids did reduce the risk of the baby being admitted to a special care unit with respiratory problems – but the reduction also occurred by just delaying the section till the mother was at least 39 weeks. So if that’s possible it should be considered. For reference Steer PJ. Giving steroids before elective caesarean section. British Medical Journal 2005;331:645-646 Stutchfield P et al. Antenatal betamethasone and incidence of neonatal respiratory distress after elective caesarean section: pragmatic randomised trial. British Medical Journal 2005;331:662-664 More Info? Too many