Mothering Forum banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
332 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I've read many sites describing that the Group B Strep test be done at 35-37 weeks, but why CAN'T it be done at 38 or 39...even 40 weeks? Or even if you test at 36, why can't you retest at 39? Is it because you might go into labor before this and they wouldn't have the results back in time? But even in that instance, what would it hurt to get tested at 35-37 weeks and then every week after or even one time after? Wouldn't this be more accurate?

I'm wondering because I'm supposed to get tested this week which will be the start of my 37th week. IF I'm + couldn't I get tested again at the next weeks appt? (My 2dc were 9 & 11 days past their edd so I expect I will have plenty of time).

Any input would be appreciated.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,675 Posts
The test results are considered valid for 5 weeks, so in theory the results should be the same at 38-40 weeks. However, waiting until that late means you could very well have the baby before the test. Why wait, when you should get the same results, but actually in time to be meaningful?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
332 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I do plan to get tested this week. It just doesn't seem all that accurate to me when I read about another woman (in another thread on MDC) that she was pos. one week and neg another and then pos. again the next.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,675 Posts
It does come and go, but the research has shown that in general you can expect the test results to be valid for 5 weeks. Is that always the case? Of course not. But the OP asked for the rationale for testing at 35-37 weeks, and that's the answer. It's also cost-conscious, as each test usually runs upward of $60. If you want to have it done weekly that's your right, but the explanation I gave is the answer to your question.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,221 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by nashvillemidwife View Post
It does come and go, but the research has shown that in general you can expect the test results to be valid for 5 weeks. Is that always the case? Of course not. But the OP asked for the rationale for testing at 35-37 weeks, and that's the answer. It's also cost-conscious, as each test usually runs upward of $60. If you want to have it done weekly that's your right, but the explanation I gave is the answer to your question.
Another thing to consider since this is the case is how many tests will your health insurance pay for? Sounds like if you retest every week and insurance does not cover it, that it could get expensive.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,675 Posts
Is there a scientific reason to have it at 35-37 weeks? Yes. We know scientifically based on average gestation of human pregnancy that if you wait longer you may very well give birth before the test can be performed or the results returned.

I guess maybe I'm not understanding your question.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by ssolberg99 View Post
I've read many sites describing that the Group B Strep test be done at 35-37 weeks, but why CAN'T it be done at 38 or 39...even 40 weeks? Or even if you test at 36, why can't you retest at 39? Is it because you might go into labor before this and they wouldn't have the results back in time? But even in that instance, what would it hurt to get tested at 35-37 weeks and then every week after or even one time after? Wouldn't this be more accurate?

I'm wondering because I'm supposed to get tested this week which will be the start of my 37th week. IF I'm + couldn't I get tested again at the next weeks appt? (My 2dc were 9 & 11 days past their edd so I expect I will have plenty of time).

Any input would be appreciated.
I remember a couple years ago reading about an 'instant' GBS test that could be done in labor. I'm not sure if it's on the market yet but it might be worth asking your health care provider about it. During my last pregnancy it was not yet available. I had tested + with my first pregnancy and then tested at 36 weeks with my second pregnancy. I asked for a retest at 38 weeks which came back negative after I took some probiotic supplements for 2 weeks. Nevertheless, they still wanted me on the IV antibiotics because I tested + with my first pregnancy. I argued with my OB about it and ended up delaying my arrival at the hospital in order to avoid the antibiotics. My baby didn't suffer from any infection whatsoever. It is my experience that having ever tested + for GBS will predispose your care provider to advise an IV antibiotic during labor. Now that I'm pg with #3, i know that whatever route I end up taking, I will not allow IV antibiotics, nor will I allow vaginal exams or PROM to occur in order to prevent GBS from entering my uterus and harming the baby, should it be present.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
594 Posts
my midwife told me i didnt have to do the GBS test at all, its such a small percent of a percent that infect the baby that its not worth the hassle to me.

BUT, i am in an area where the transfer hospital would not be worried about my not having been tested. that is a rare occurrence.

really, because they still watch ALL babies for signs of GBS infection, you could theoretically swab your elbow to ensure a negative result, unless you want unnecessary antibiotics that have been proven to not help reduce risks.
it could save you a big headache.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
665 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jackies Ladybug View Post

unnecessary antibiotics that have been proven to not help reduce risks.
Although the testing method has its pitfalls, prophylactic antibiotics have decreased the incidence of early-onset GBS by 70% since CDC guidelines were put in place. It's an individual choice that one must make, but please be aware that while there are drawbacks, there are proven benefits to this practice.

http://www.cdc.gov/groupbstrep/hospi...l_overview.htm
 

· Registered
Joined
·
585 Posts
http://www.childbirth.org/articles/GBS.html

I like this site's take on it. It give you facts and stats, also reinstates that you have choices, and goes over which infants may be at higher risks than others. Of course as we know, its always good to double check any info found online, but its a starting point!
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top