Re: RCT supports expectant management 42 wks

From: art fougner, md (evsono@pipeline.com)
Sat Dec 26 10:39:34 1998


and now for something completely different - try using in the denominator of perinatal mortality, the number of patients remaining UNDELIVERED instead. when you do this, mortality rises beginning after 38+ wks and keeps climbing.

i know, i know - not evidenced based and probably not a valid statistical exercise but it is still food for thought.

Art

At Sat, 26 Dec 1998, Pat Sonnenstuhl wrote: >
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>In my learnings, term is 40 weeks. 37 weeks is the point at which, if
>the baby were born, the baby would be well formed. If 37 weeks were
>term, then we'd feel the two weeks before that would be a normal range.
>that puts us at 35 weeks, when many babies still have problems. Upon
>what do you base your definition.
>
>RModugno@aol.com wrote:
>>
>> << >Mine can be expressed as follows: I believe in fetal testing and am
>> >willing to test these patients beginning at 41 weeks' gestation and
>> >until they are truly post-term, that is 43 weeks. At that time , I
>> >consider labor induction with intravaginal misoprostol (50 mcg q'3-4
>> >hrs). Some of my partners (MFMs) opt for an earlier induction. Of
>> >course, I can be flexible, and if a given patient is 42 weeks' gestation
>> >with a very favorable cervix, I can go along with an induction.
>> >Certainly, the policy changes with patients that have other problems
>> >i.e, chronic hypertension, diabetes, etc. We also encounter
>> >difficulties with the often-seen patient who has "uncertain" dates. I
>> >personally am of the opinion that inducing patient's at 41 week's
>> >gestation is unnecessary. Remember, term is defined as 40 weeks plus or
>> >minus 2 weeks.
>> >Anyway, this is an interesting and controversial subject. We need to
>> >keep discussing it. >>
>>
>> Just to be the devil's advocate, I thought that term was defined as 37
>> completed weeks.
>>
>> Robert Modugno MD FACOG
>> Marietta GA
>--------------24E282732C581E0C54A481AA
>Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Content-Description: Card for Pat Sonnenstuhl, ARNP, CNM
>Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf"
>
>begin: vcard
>fn: Pat Sonnenstuhl, ARNP, CNM
>n: Sonnenstuhl, ARNP, CNM;Pat
>org: http://www.childbirth.org
>email;internet: webmidwife1@home.com
>title: Midwifery and Women's Health Care Consultant
>note: Olympia, WA
>x-mozilla-cpt: ;0
>x-mozilla-html: FALSE
>version: 2.1
>end: vcard
>
>--------------24E282732C581E0C54A481AA--





use when must restrict search to only the ob-gyn-l forum...
Enter search keywords:
Returns per screen: Require all keywords:

Return to  OB-GYN-L 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: Mon Nov 2 05:29:52 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.