PubMed · 11189591
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
S G Jonquil. 2000. Paradigm shift.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11189591/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
OBJECTIVE: to determine what impact the changes from consultant-led care to midwife-led care in a local maternity service have had on women using that service. DESIGN: case study, data were collected by postal questionnaire, semi-structured, tape-recorded interviews, observations and scrutiny of records. SETTING: a small town in rural England. PARTICIPANTS: all pregnant women eligible for a midwife-managed unit (MMU) birth in a small rural town in England. FINDINGS: the women using the MMU were satisfied with the care they received and the MMU style of care. Women giving birth at the MMU and at home required less pain relief and were more likely to have an intact perineum than a similar group of women giving birth in hospital. Continuity of carer did not appear to be an issue for women as long as they felt supported by a known team of midwives. Transfer for complications during the birthing process was a cause for anxiety and stress for women and their partners. Women, whilst satisfied with the MMU, would prefer the consultant-led maternity hospital to be re-established in the town. The home-birth rate rose by 28% when the consultant unit closed. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: while the establishment of a midwife-managed unit has provided increased choice for a minority of women, the removal of the consultant unit in the town has disadvantaged the majority of pregnant women. While guidelines are needed when establishing these units the application of restrictive inclusion and exclusion criteria can sometimes force women to make less appropriate birth choices.
Maternal death from pulmonary aspiration of gastric contents has virtually disappeared in the United Kingdom. The one case documented in the most recent triennial report was a woman with multiorgan failure in intensive care and is probably not relevant to the current debate [1]. Although not so well documented, other Western countries seem to be experiencing the same decline in maternal death from this cause. At the same time, the burden of proof is falling increasingly on obstetric anesthesiologists as obstetricians and midwives demand that NPO policies should be rejected, unless anesthesiologists can prove that they are necessary. Without any proof of benefit, many midwives actively encourage eating in women who do not really want to eat. A hospital manager who wants to divert money to other areas of health care might make the same argument about employing less experienced--and therefore cheaper--anesthesiologists or nurse anesthetists on the labor floor. Although no self-respecting obstetric anesthesiologist would accept such a situation, there is still no randomized controlled trial that proves that experienced anesthesiologists reduce maternal mortality. Similarly it is difficult for a mother to comprehend the negligible risk of pulmonary aspiration during labor while her care providers insist that it would be more dangerous for her to cross a busy road! Against a background of conflicting advice from midwives and medical practitioners, the mother is likely to eat if she feels so inclined. Pulmonary aspiration is a rare complication, so even if a light diet in labor became acceptable, it is likely that it would take many years for a subsequent increase in maternal mortality to become apparent. It would be disappointing if mistakes made by a previous generation had to be relearned in the twenty-first century. Increasingly, media-controlled pressure groups dictate health fashions, and the physicians frequently can only stand on the sidelines and advise. Most obstetric anesthesiologists agree that a rigid NPO policy in labor is no longer appropriate and that at least water or ice chips should be allowed. Current evidence suggests that solids and semi-solids should be avoided once a woman is in active labor or requests analgesia. The appropriate advice is to allow a carefully audited introduction of isotonic drinks. These drinks seem to be an effective medium for providing calories while minimizing any increase in gastric volume, and such a policy would be unlikely to reverse the reduction in aspiration that has been achieved over the past 50 years.
Severe pre-eclampsia is a complex disease, which taxes the expertise of even the most experienced obstetric anesthesiologist. The treatment should focus on stabilization of blood pressure, optimization of fluid status, and prevention of convulsions. Neuraxial blocks for labor and delivery offer many benefits to the mother and her infant. For cesarean section, there is unequivocal evidence of superiority of neuraxial anesthesia over general anesthesia. If general anesthesia is needed, careful preanesthetic preparation and meticulous airway management is essential. The successful and safe peripartum management of the pre-eclamptic patient and her infant is a team effort among the anesthesiologist, obstetrician, and neonatologist.