![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Something I spotted recently in health news:
Usual Exam Can Miss Potential Breech Births
http://www.wwaytv3.com/Global/story.asp?S=5238676&nav=menu70_8
"The usual examination that doctors perform to determine the position of a baby in a mother's womb in late pregnancy isn't sensitive enough and misses breech and other abnormal fetal positions, a new Australian study suggests.
[...]
For the study, the researchers identified 1,633 women pregnant with one child at 35 to 37 weeks' gestation. Each woman had a clinical exam to assess the position of the baby. This was followed by an ultrasound scan to confirm the diagnosis.
The clinical exam found 70 percent of breech presentations, the researchers reported. More diagnoses were correct when women had had a previous pregnancy and lower body mass index.
Applying this percentage to a general population of 1,000 pregnant women, a clinical exam would identify 101 women with breech presentation, but 56 would actually have a breech presentation, and 24 women with one would be missed, according to the report."*
Well, yes. Speaking as one of the missed 30 percent, apparently a manual exam doesn't do that great job of determining a baby's position. And I can't even blame my doctor, since he was one of four people who examined me from 36 weeks on, and they all missed it. I don't think knowing K was in a bad position would have changed much, but it would have been nice to have a chance at turning her. I'm not sure it would have worked, since my private theory is that she couldn't turn because she was so long she didn't have enough room. So I probably would have had the section anyway, but I would have been pregnant for 9 fewer days, which would have been nice.
Mostly, what I'm taking away from this article is 1) apparently what happened to me isn't that rare (and I have no idea how I feel about that) and 2), while I had been contemplating demanding an ultrasound to check position the next time around, I'm now planning on it, and this study gives me some good ammunition.
*I could do with a little less emphasis on how much more likely this is to happen with obese women. Given that I wasn't even overweight when I got pregnant and gained a perfectly acceptable 35 pounds, it's not necessarily pleasing to read quite so much of the implication of "This is your own fault, Chubby."
Usual Exam Can Miss Potential Breech Births
http://www.wwaytv3.com/Global/story.asp?S=5238676&nav=menu70_8
"The usual examination that doctors perform to determine the position of a baby in a mother's womb in late pregnancy isn't sensitive enough and misses breech and other abnormal fetal positions, a new Australian study suggests.
[...]
For the study, the researchers identified 1,633 women pregnant with one child at 35 to 37 weeks' gestation. Each woman had a clinical exam to assess the position of the baby. This was followed by an ultrasound scan to confirm the diagnosis.
The clinical exam found 70 percent of breech presentations, the researchers reported. More diagnoses were correct when women had had a previous pregnancy and lower body mass index.
Applying this percentage to a general population of 1,000 pregnant women, a clinical exam would identify 101 women with breech presentation, but 56 would actually have a breech presentation, and 24 women with one would be missed, according to the report."*
Well, yes. Speaking as one of the missed 30 percent, apparently a manual exam doesn't do that great job of determining a baby's position. And I can't even blame my doctor, since he was one of four people who examined me from 36 weeks on, and they all missed it. I don't think knowing K was in a bad position would have changed much, but it would have been nice to have a chance at turning her. I'm not sure it would have worked, since my private theory is that she couldn't turn because she was so long she didn't have enough room. So I probably would have had the section anyway, but I would have been pregnant for 9 fewer days, which would have been nice.
Mostly, what I'm taking away from this article is 1) apparently what happened to me isn't that rare (and I have no idea how I feel about that) and 2), while I had been contemplating demanding an ultrasound to check position the next time around, I'm now planning on it, and this study gives me some good ammunition.
*I could do with a little less emphasis on how much more likely this is to happen with obese women. Given that I wasn't even overweight when I got pregnant and gained a perfectly acceptable 35 pounds, it's not necessarily pleasing to read quite so much of the implication of "This is your own fault, Chubby."
