Okay, I'm going there...

[luckymamato2]

What is so wrong with using a doppler?

[KittyKat]

Doppler is ultrasound, and while it is a different intensity than the type used for visual scans, it is constant, not pulses. Therefore ten minutes of doppler is equal to a much greater length of exposure to the visual scan type.

Those who wish to avoid ultrasound exposure if it is not medically necessary often include use of a fetoscope rather than a doppler in their pregnancy care plans.

[bizzemama]

I heard it had a higher frequency than was safe for baby ears

[Spirulina&Sage]

from my understanding (my midwife have me this info) a doppler is 10 X as strong as an ultrasound..so 1 minute of doppler is like an hour long ultrasound exposure.

it is invasive..it is very strong sound waves that go in and bounce off whatever it is..in this case, your new growing baby..

it has been proven to cause damage to growing cells and also to cause major disruption to animals and wildlife (it is used underwater by military..and it causes whales to beech themselves,..ect ect..)

i chose not to use any doppler or ultrasound with my second child, after doing much research after my son was born. i had an ultrasound at 10 weeks to determine my EDD and then used doppler for routine exams because i didnt know better. he was very tiny at birth, but not early, and still is very small for his age..and i believe it is partially caused by the disruption that these procedures caused him..my daughter stayed in longer, though generally 2nd babies come earlier.. and was much healthier at birth 10lbs8oz..

maybe im totally wrong, but my instincts and intuition say its something to do with this...

[Spark]

Just take every reason that people don't like U/S and multiply that. Doppler is much much stronger.

[shellbell]

WOW!!! I didn't know all that about the doppler. You know, when I was pregnant with my first, a midwife used a doppler on me only once, and I remember being really weirded out, because when she put the doppler on my belly, it felt like the baby moved really really quickly to one side of my womb. It was strange, and I didn't like it. Makes me kinda angry that I didn't know all this stuff... and that she would use that without ASKING me first. I remember asking her what it was when it was about an inch from my belly.

[Spirulina&Sage]

the only time my midwife used a doppler with mny dd was at like 40 weeks and i went in and lay down for her to check the HB..she always used the fetascope but she spaced out and used the dopler instead and baby kicked it out of her hand. she jumped So hard from it.. and right away my MW was like "OH! you dont want the doppler! im so sorry!" it all happened in about 5 seconds..
baby was not happy at all. i think it really scared her!

[Romana]

I had a long reply for this thread and lost it. :

I heard it had a higher frequency than was safe for baby ears

True. There was a study done in Europe (no, I lost the link . . . and can't find it again . . . that showed minor damage to the hearing of infants on whom doppler had been used in the womb. These infants had more difficulty hearing certain low-frequency sounds.

Dd also hated doppler. The nurse seemed to think it was funny - every time the doppler was on my uterus, baby would flee. I don't think it's funny at all. Next time, no doppler. I had a bad feeling about it the whole time, and should have said something, but I was less emancipated from the whole "doctor is in charge" thing then.

(ok, so my thoughts about dd are completely subjective. But next time I'll follow my instinct on this one.)

There are also some mainstream doctors who have expressed concern over the availablity of dopplers for rent and womens' perceptions that you can use a doppler every day for hours to listen to the h/b with no damage. (I saw a news article that mentioned this, but that was more than 6 mos ago and can't find it, either.) Remember the flap everybody made about Tom Cruise buying an ultrasound machine? About how "unsafe" that was? IMO, doppler is generally less safe than u/s because of all the reasons listed by others.

Sorry if I left something out; I'm trying not to repeat what others said.

Julia
dd 8mos

[shellbell]

So if dopplers are so dangerous... what about the continuos monitoring they do when you're in labor? Is that the same thing or something different and on a lower frequency?

[mwherbs]

the more frank dangers of ultrasound are just that continous monitoring of low risk pregnancies during labor- decreasing mobility and increasing interventions but without improving outcomes.--

as for doppler or ultrasound use here is one page and even though this person has a bias for ultrasound he does list the various questions about safety that have come up-- be sure to scroll all the way down the page and read the info
http://www.ob-ultrasound.net/joewoo3x.html

[koru]

i can't believe this is all so new to me! i suppose i just assumed doppler was a much less "invasive" means of checking Baby than ultrasound.

my midwives used a doppler with both my girls (during pregnancy & labor) & i don't remember a thing out of the ordinary. but this one....the first time doc tried to listen to the HB it took a while because Baby was moving all over the place!

don't most midwives/docs who attend natural deliveries use doppler over continuous monitoring during labor?

[luckymamato2]

I was monitored throughout my pregnancy with doppler and I also rented a doppler and used it alot, sometimes multiple times a day. It was very reassuring for me, after years of infertility. I was also monitored throughout my active labor with doppler - probably every 5-10 minutes. If there is another pregnancy for me, I think I will seek the reassurance of hearing the h/b - I'm not sure I will rent another unit, but we'll see. I will probably see a homebirth midwife for prenatal care and as soon as we can use a fetoscope, I will request that be used instead.

[alegna]

Originally Posted by shellbell

So if dopplers are so dangerous... what about the continuos monitoring they do when you're in labor? Is that the same thing or something different and on a lower frequency?

My understanding is that it's basically the same as doppler. Maybe someone else has more info.

-Angela

[KittyKat]

don't most midwives/docs who attend natural deliveries use doppler over continuous monitoring during labor?

The "continuous monitoring" device IS a doppler.

It's kind of a no-brainer that if you're going to use a doppler during labor, the "natural" preference is going to be using it intermittently for quick checks rather that strapping it on for hours at a time!

Even better would be a fetoscope, no U/S involved, but harder to find a caregiver who does that.

[afishwithabike]

Originally Posted by shellbell

So if dopplers are so dangerous... what about the continuos monitoring they do when you're in labor? Is that the same thing or something different and on a lower frequency?

If you read here a LOT you'll find that this is a barbaric practice and many won't allow for it. I didn't. The straps monitor differently. BUT it is still barbaric.

[anubis]

Originally Posted by shellbell

So if dopplers are so dangerous... what about the continuos monitoring they do when you're in labor? Is that the same thing or something different and on a lower frequency?

From here:

The foetal heart rate is recorded continuously by Doppler ultrasound, while a tocodynameter records the uterine contraction pattern.

So yes, it's a Doppler. Whether or not it causes damage, I don't know. I would think at that point, with the baby being fully developed, there would be less risks than earlier on. Not to say there wouldn't be any risks at all. I honestly know very little about this, I've got so much reading to do.


As a side note, I love this forum. You find so many things to do research on here that you wouldn't find on other boards. Me likey research.

[shellbell]

I also love this site. I had already decided that if this body has any more children, it will be at home. There would be no use of dopplers at home... I wish I knew then what they were doing to me and my children.

When I had my second daughter, I requested that they do intermittent monitoring. I went to the hospital pretty close to transition and they insisted on having the strap thing on my belly instead of the intermittent monitoring that my midwife said I could have. It didn't matter anyway, cuz I ripped it off about ten minutes later, saying something like "THIS THING has got to COME OFF!"
I fumbled with it for a minute and then the nurse took it off for me. Kinda crazy... strapping something around a laboring woman's belly.

[velveeta]

I never really knew exactly *what* was so harmful about doppler. I just don't use it b/c after trying it with DS, I am pretty sure that babies *hate* it!

All of the arguments that I have read here make sense to me. My MW uses a fetoscope, and my mother just puts her ear to my belly!

You know what we need? An icon for "creepy." That is how I feel about doppler. ccccccrrrrrreeeeeeeeppppppyyyyyy!

[pinuchkin]

Originally Posted by Romana9+2

True. There was a study done in Europe (no, I lost the link . . . and can't find it again . . . that showed minor damage to the hearing of infants on whom doppler had been used in the womb. These infants had more difficulty hearing certain low-frequency sounds.

Gotta jump in here as an audiologist ... I haven't been able to find any controlled studies linking ultrasound or doppler use to hearing loss at any age, so I'd love to see the citation if anyone knows it.

There was a study of the acoustic output of the diagnostic ultrasound performed through the Mayo Clinic in 2005, presented at the Acoustical Society of America.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...=pubmed_docsum

The study concluded that at the concentration point (the 'hit point' of the ultrasound probe), the sound level could reach up to 100dB SPL. Before anybody gets up in arms over that number, we have to remember that the measurement we're used to seeing for decibels is different, it's dB HL. In most measurement scenarios, dB HL is significantly lower than dB SPL (depends on the frequencies and stimulus method used). That is, if the research so far says 100dB SPL, the hearing level (HL) conversion may be to the order of 80dB HL or less.

So is the sound audible to infants? It's very likely, esp. if the probe were placed near the fetus' face. What does it sound like? A very high-pitched tapping so fast that it might sound almost like a hum. Is it going to damage their hearing? I have never seen a study draw that conclusion. I would doubt it would provoke significant change/damage to the status of the fetal ear. The maternal heartbeat & voice has also been measured in utero at ~90dB HL which is similar to (or possibly even louder than) the level of the probe given expected conversion values.

I have had no concerns for such in my own pregnancies (this coming from a person who made custom-molded earplugs for our 18 month old daughter prior to attending a small community fireworks display and who wears earplugs to all parades in case there are fire trucks or cannons ...). I do have a home doppler, and use it periodically for reassurance checks for a minute or two at a time. My belief based on my own readings is that doppler rental companies should require a physical sign-off from the attending physician/midwife, indicating that the care provider had discussed risks/benefits and APPROPRIATE use of the doppler device with the mom. That is, a heartbeat check for 30-60 seconds once or twice a week for a few months, vs. listening for hours to the baby should be strongly considered when looking at the data points.