Re: Clinical scenario
From: Jamie (ajfields@pine-net.com)
Sat Oct 14 08:13:03 2006
Just saw this, but I'm disturbed by the idea that a baby who needs
intensive care might be redefined as a healthy baby just b/c he's not
likely to die. Mortality isn't the only issue. Good outcomes certainly
make it easier to decide whether to deliver a seriously preeclamptic
mother, but I think the proposed new definition makes light of the
effects of early separation on the family. NICU, even for a few days,
is an incredibly stressful time.
At Thu, 12 Oct 2006, Elrod, Darryl G Maj 48 MDOS/SGOBO wrote:
>
>The textbooks still list less than 37 weeks as preterm, so technically
>she would be preterm. I recently heard Nicoliades (?sp) speak in London
>and he stated that in this day and age, with the NICUs we have and the
>outcomes we get, we should really stop calling preterm less than 37
>weeks and move it to less than 32 weeks. I don't necessarily agree with
>that for our facility, but for those in big cities I think he probably
>is right.
>
>I think preterm labor would be a fine diagnosis for this admission.
>
>(Damn, I have to start thinking about diagnosis for admission since my
>days in the service are quickly coming to an end!)
>
>Glen
>
>//SIGNED//
>
>D. Glen Elrod, Maj., USAF, MC
>
>Obstetrician/Gynecologist
>
>Chief of Obstetrics
>
>48 MDOS/SGOBO
>
>RAF Lakenheath, England
>
>Telephone DSN: 314-226-8130
>
> Comm: +44 (0) 1638 52 8130
>
>Notice of Confidentiality
>Under the Privacy Act of 1974, you must safeguard all information
>reflected on this e-mail and, if applicable, all attachments.
>Disclosure of information is IAW AFI 33-119, AFI 33-127, AFI 37-131, AFI
>37-132, AFI 33-219, and PL 93-579"
>This e-mail message including any attachments is for the sole use of the
>intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
>information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is
>prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
>sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
>Any questions pertaining to disclosure should be directed to the privacy
>officer.
>
>________________________________
>
>________________________________
>From: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net [mailto:ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net] On Behalf Of
>
>--
>________________________________
>Stmidwife@aol.com
>________________________________
>Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2006 8:59 PM
>To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L
>Subject: Re: Clinical scenario
>
>Have seen this several occasions with my own clients, and once during
>while doing my clinical to get my license with a very intelligent OB who
>thank goodness taught me that if someone is not in labor, they need to
>go home if everything is normal. The clients I have had. for example,
>one was 8cm and remained that way for 8 days then had a five hour labor
>and similarly with the others. Why was the midwife checking her at this
>time anyhow and what possible dx could you claim for insurance purposes
>for keeping her in the hospital all this time? This woman would not be
>considered preterm here in So CA area in my experience.
>
>Sue
>
>Colossians 3:12: And so, as those who have been chosen of God, holy and
>beloved, put on a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness
>and patience...
>
--
JFields, RN, BSN
|
|
