|
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
Re: A caseFrom: Robert J Woolley (wooll005@gold.tc.umn.edu)Mon Dec 2 14:24:41 1996
On Mon, 2 Dec 1996, John Robertson wrote:
> I realize I am splitting hairs, but there is a difference between post
Hmmm. I don't recall hearing this definition of "postdates" before. Any
published source for this?
>
Multicentre Trial on Induction vs Monitoring of patients over 41 weeks (I
> used to call it the Canadian study until someone pointed out that there Although it has been a couple of years since I read that paper, I'm quite confident that that was *not* the recommendation. My recollection is that they enrolled patients at 41 weeks, then tried monitor vs. induction, and found no significant difference in fetal outcome. There were more c-sections in the observed group than the induced group, but the authors took some pains to point out that a cause-and-effect connection could not be inferred, since it was very likely that attending physicians had a lower threshold of sectioning in the latest gestations. But perhaps you could find and quote the article where the authors make the "recommendation" you allege. I am highly skeptical of your claim, frankly.
|
|
Return to
|
Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Wed Dec 2 05:17:59 2009 |
The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.