Hi Sally
do you know when it was published?? I have access to the journal but if you have the dates it narrows it down a lot
Katrina
Does anyone have access to this guideline??
The AWHONN () guidelines which accept q10 minutes for "low risk" situations
Sally Westbury
Homebirth Midwife
"L
Does anyone have access to
this guideline??
The AWHONN () guidelines
which accept q10 minutes for "low risk" situations
Sally Westbury
Homebirth Midwife
"Learn from
mothers and babies; every one of them has a unique story to tell. Look for
wisdom in the humblest places - that's u
Hi listers
I will check our policies at work when I am there next, but all our policies have research that is referenced to it! So I will check our monitoring policy and let you know
:-)
Katrina
<>
www.niagaraparkshow.com.au
So true Sue!! - hung out to dry then burnt at the stake!
- Original Message -
From: "Susan Cudlipp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 7:23 PM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] intermittent auscultation
> This is so true.
> We constantly have to jus
al Message -
From:
sally
williams
To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au
Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 7:31
PM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] intermittent
auscultation
Once a month, where I work, we have a Practice Improvement
Committee Mee
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] intermittent auscultation
This is so true.
We constantly have to justify our belief in the natural process of birth and
should a mishap happen in midwifery care, the midwife is all but burnt at
the stake.
By contrast, most hospitals have regular mortality meetings to discuss
uot; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 11:15 AM
Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] intermittent auscultation
Pete, the only problem is that the "somebodies", in positions of power,
have
set a standard that "a reasonable midwife" has to adhere to, or suffer
I certainly have never seen any evidence. All one gets is
textbooks and protocol manuals telling you that you must but not
referencing the reason.
Cheers
Judy
--- Sally Westbury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to go further with today's radical thought.
>
> I believe there is not e
Sally,
I think you have a very valid point & could argue it effectively.
Good luck !
Brenda
- Original Message -
From: "Sue Cookson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 3:03 PM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] intermittent auscultation
Hi Sue,
I think you have missed the point.
The alternative is not continuous fetal monitoring. As the research
shows this is not best practice.
The alternative is perhaps guidelines that say 15 minutely in second
stage for low risk women. As these guidelines say:
The American College of Obste
Interesting line on intermittent auscultation.
If mws aren't given the OK to listen intermittently, then every woman
would be strapped to a CTG machine with its accompanying restrictions of
time and position.
Having done a placement recently where CTG's were the norm because of
the hospital's t
coalface are they ?
GR
Brenda
- Original Message -
From: "Mary Murphy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 11:15 AM
Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] intermittent auscultation
> Pete, the only problem is that the "somebodies"
ren't at the coalface are they ?
GR
Brenda
- Original Message -
From: "Mary Murphy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 11:15 AM
Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] intermittent auscultation
Pete, the only problem is that the "so
day, July 30, 2005 11:15 AM
Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] intermittent auscultation
Pete, the only problem is that the "somebodies", in positions of power,
have
set a standard that "a reasonable midwife" has to adhere to, or suffer the
consequences if there is an adverse outcome,
; baby alone to do their job !
Dear Lord
Brenda
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 9:34 AM
Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] intermittent auscultation
Sally I agree with what both you and Gloria are saying, with a low risk
women te
Pete, the only problem is that the "somebodies", in positions of power, have
set a standard that "a reasonable midwife" has to adhere to, or suffer the
consequences if there is an adverse outcome, ie, a dead or compromised baby.
Also, when one is employed by the Govt. there is an expectation that t
Sally I agree with what both you and Gloria are saying, with a low risk
women term and all progressing well in labour where is the evidence to
support any auscultation, I also believe that it can he horribly
invasive and could easily be construed as intervention. Surely as
professionals we can use
I remember asking Anne Frye what she thought about this and she said "Second
stage heart tones are the insanity of N. American midwives". It is completely
disruptive of the trance state in second stage to be poking at the mother with
a fetoscope. In a woman with normal BP, cephalic presentatio
I would like to go further with today’s
radical thought.
I believe there is not evidence to support
the 5 minutely interval of intermittent monitoring in a low risk population in
second stage of labour.
What do people think about this.
Do you think I could argue this point
ef
OK.
What the Nice Guideline have based the bulk of their guideline
on are the following three studies. All of these studies have randomized high
and low risk pregnancies.
I
would like to propose that the auscultation intervals set are reflective of a
lack of risk screening.
I
would like t
20 matches
Mail list logo
