If your water broke prior to the onset of labor

[Swirly]

Were you GBS positive? My doula said out of the many births she has attended, that most whose waters broke prior to labor were GBS positive, so I was curious to get some data here. I was tested as GBS positive, and my water did break before labor.

[storychick]

With #1 no, it broke to start labor but I was GBS neg.

With #2 yes, I was +. And I had a small leak that resealed (we think) at 35 weeks with her as well, then had water break for real to start labor at 39w6d.

[Lkg4dmcrc]

Mine broke at the start of labor and I was GBS negative

[sreese68]

With #1 and #3, water broke first, and I was GBS- both times. (Poll only let me vote once.)

Interestingly, #2 ended up in the NICU due to pneumonia. Came down with it 12 hours after birth, so the doctors think he caught it from the birth canal. My water didn't break until after labor started, I was GBS-, and I had a short labor (3 hours). Kind of goes against conventional wisdom...

[MamaTaraX]

That's an interesting correlation. I hope there are more responses because I'm curious now

Namaste, Tara

[forest~mama]

My water started actively leaking three days before she was born. I didn't ever get tested, so who knows!

[ABand3]

My water did NOT break prior to labor - I was GBS+ with the first two, didn't test the third time.

[lovemysunshine]

Mine broke prior both times. I was negative for #1 and did not test with #2. I voted for negative.

[boscopup]

I had PPROM at 29 weeks, and they tested for GBS, since PPROM typically happens due to *some* type of infection. I was GBS-. They never did find any reason for my PPROM. It's usually infection, and sometimes IC. The infection doesn't necessary have to be GBS. It could be all kinds of things - UTI, BV, etc.

[annarosa]

first time I was positive and my waters broke early
second time I did not test - waters broke just before baby was born

[pbreffe]

I have been positive both times. And both times I was in labor for hours before my water broke.

[bradleybirth2mom]

Ask how many births she has attended and count the voters when this poll closes. Stop counting the poll votes when it coincides with the births she has attended. If there is a big discrepancy, it may just be that she ends up with more GBS patients than is the general population of preggos. GBS is only a problem with .5% of babies in moms colonized with it, so it is a non-issue---the only way to know if it has colonized the baby is shortly after birth, if the baby has trouble breathing and other problems---you can discuss this further with your MW.

My water broke 3 days after the due date and I was GBS negative----waters break due to many factors---poor nutrition, the onset of labor, meconium in the waters, infection, and the list goes on. GBS is just another factor and generally not a concern.

[veganf]

No idea. I never got around to getting tested. No problems with either baby though.

[sarathan]

My water broke prior to labor and I was GBS negative.

[laohaire]

I had PROM but not PPROM. Didn't get tested. I wonder if she was referring to PPROM specifically.

[Swirly]

At the time of my birth, she had attended 119 births. I don't think she felt that GBS was anything to be worried about, she was just musing that it might be an indicator of how labor might start for her full-term clients who tested GBS positive. (Of course we all know that a test done at 35 weeks may have nothing to do with a woman's status at 37-42 weeks..).

Anyway, even for our relatviely small dataset here, it would seem to not be a correlative factor. I just wanted to collect some data for curiosity's sake.

[citymama]

another MDC mom and nurse suggested that PROM was typically a result of the baby's positioning.

[dnr3301]

I voted "negative", because with my first, I tested - and waters broke well before labor started. My second, waters broke first too, but I hadn't been tested.