Re: Another Myth Busted
From: midwifeim@earthlink.net
Sun Jul 9 08:09:58 2006
Coincidence? Even if so, nothing was lost but a tablespoon of semen, which the husband was happy to get rid of anyway. Other advantages: no bad side effects, no uterine hyperstimulation, no nausea, and semen is even cheaper than cytotec.
As I mentioned earlier, there were many other cases reported to us midwives, and we ourselves were some of them. My last was born at 37 weeks, because I felt he was getting huge and 15 months earlier I had had a near 10-pounder. My husband was confident that he could start my labor and he did. Was that a coincidence? My experience of my body says No. That son weighed 8 lbs. 10 oz., btw.
We midwives made the connection between intercourse (especially that which includes orgasm for the woman) and onset of labor at term before we were aware that semen contained prostaglandins. Knowing that it did explained the phenomenon.
About doing an RCT to settle the question, this would be hilarious. I can imagine the observers needed to make sure that the induction-by-sex group was minding the protocol and the group randomized to no sex behaved themselves (and were denied induction by other means).
The Brits (that's where I am now, btw) put more stock in research that includes pregnant women's observations. It's called qualitative research, and it can turn up some realities that can be missed by RCTs.
My tuppence.
Ina May
-----Original Message-----
>From: "Garry E. Siegel, M.D." <garrys@mindspring.com>
>Sent: Jul 8, 2006 3:03 PM
>To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L <ob-gyn-l@dns.obgyn.net>
>Subject: Re: Another Myth Busted
>
>Ina May:
>
>Respectfully, might labor have been a coincidence?
>
>Garry
>
>At Sat, 08 Jul 2006, doctorjoe@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>Uh, have we all FORGOTTEN why they're named "PROSTA-glandins"???
>>
>>Joe P.
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: midwifeim@earthlink.net
>>To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L <ob-gyn-l@dns.obgyn.net>
>>Sent: Sat, 8 Jul 2006 09:02:46 -0500
>>Subject: Re: Another Myth Busted
>>
>>it
>>ect
>>(onset of labor).
>>
>>40
>>weeks. Husband arrived from CA, was happy that I had prescribed sex without
>> He
>>was also the one who found the article explaining that prostaglandin was
>>plentiful in semen. This is only one case out of dozens.
>>
>>Ina May
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Jamie <ajfields@pine-net.com>
>>>Sent: Jul 5, 2006 4:29 PM
>>>To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L <ob-gyn-l@dns.obgyn.net>
>>>Subject: Re: Another Myth Busted
>>>
>>>I wonder if a randomized study would show something different. Women
>>>who are closer to birth may be more uncomfortable and less interested in
>>>intercourse, thus the negative correlation.
>>>
>>>At Wed, 5 Jul 2006, Anna Meenan, MD wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Sexual intercourse at term does not hasten labor
>>>>
>>>>The objective of this study by a researcher from Columbus, Ohio was to
>>>>determine whether sexual intercourse at term hastens the onset of labor
>>>>and to observe its effect on cervical status. Women with low-risk
>>>>pregnancies at term were asked at each of their term prenatal visits
>>>>whether they had engaged in penile-vaginal intercourse during the
>>>>previous week. Delivery outcomes were compared between those women who
>>>>were sexually active at term and those who were not. A Bishop score was
>>>>assigned to each cervical examination at term, and the weekly results of
>>>>the cervical examination were compared between women who were sexually
>>>>active in the previous week and those who were not.
>>>>
>>>>The researcher found that 47 (50.5%) of 93 women reported having had
>>>>sexual intercourse at term. The gestational age at delivery of those
>>>>women who were sexually active at term was greater than those who were
>>>>not (39.9 weeks versus 39.3 weeks; P = 0.001). There was no difference
>>>>in Bishop score between women who had sex in the previous week and those
>>>>who had not. After adjusting for the effect of time, those who were
>>>>sexually active the previous week had Bishop scores that were, on
>>>>average, lower by 0.26 compared with those who abstained.
>>>>
>>iated
>>>>with ripening of the cervix and does not hasten labor.”
>>>>
>>>>This is important information for GPs re this oft-enquired-about area
>>s
>>better may
>>>>feel more inclined towards sexual activity and there is an issue re the
>>>>accuracy of responses. The findings of this study should not be used as
>>>>an example of the potential misapplication of EBM by partners: the study
>>>>does not recommend all pregnant women engage in sexual activity in the
>>>>last few weeks of pregnancy.
>>>>
>>>>Obstetrics & Gynecology 2006;107:1310-1314. © 2006 by The American
>>>>College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
>>>>Sexual Intercourse at Term and Onset of Labor, Jonathan Schaffir, MD.
>>>>
>>>>Category W. Pregnancy/Childbirth/Family Planning, X. Female Genital
>>>>System, Breast, Y. Male Genital System . Keywords: sexual activity,
>>>>term, onset, labor, cohort study
>>>>Synopsis edited by Dr Stephen Wilkinson, Melbourne. Posted on Global
>>>>Family Doctor 5 July 2006
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>Anna Meenan, MD
>>>>
>>>--
>>>JFields, RN, BSN
>>________________________________________________________________________
>>Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email and IM=
>>________________________________________________________________________
>>
>>________________________________________________________________________
>>. All on demand. Always Free.
>>________________________________________________________________________
>
>--
>Garry E. Siegel, M.D.
>Private Practice
>Roswell, GA
