Reduce Unnecessary Inductions, Reduce C-Sections (Article from Time)

[umsami]

http://www.time.com/time/health/arti...007754,00.html

Some pretty impressive results from one hospital that instituted some strict guidelines on when "elective" inductions could be scheduled (39 weeks or later, Bishop's score must be favorable, etc.)

Researchers found that under the new policy the overall induction rate dropped 33% and the rate of elective inductions fell by roughly the same amount. What's more, the total number of C-sections among first-time mothers who underwent elective induction dropped 60%.

[JessicaS]

Thanks for posting the article.

[MittensKittens]

Thanks!

[Galatea]

Wow!!!!! The article said that when Magee Hospital (local for me) changed the induction policy to after 39 weeks, must have favorable Bishop score, must have medical reason, the c-section rate for first-time moms dropped 60%! That is huge!

It makes me upset that so many docs make it seem like they can just "turn on" labor and have it be okay. For example, they induced my husband's cousin at 37 weeks 0 days with her 5th b/c she was tired and they knew it would work on a 5th time mom... it worked, but the baby was premature and had to be in the NICU and didn't nurse well for awhile. Messing with God's/nature's plan for these things has consequences.

[honeybee]

The problem I have with all these sorts of articles is that they make it sound like women are the ones driving the "elective" induction trend, when very often the doctors are ENCOURAGING scheduled inductions and convincing women they need to have an earlier induction due to a "big baby" or a "small pelvis" etc. Or, just because the doctor is going on vacation or not going to be on call, so they tell the women to schedule so they'll get their preferred doc for the birth.

And yes, often women do request them, but that is also because they are not truly informed about the potential complications.

I think standards like these need to be in place in hospitals to keep the doctors in check.