Tag: Birth

Investment Podcasts 2021 Jeffrey Althoff

Top Podcasts for Pregnancy and Birth

On April 23, 2021

In Child Health Care, Neonatal Care, Newborn Screening, Newborns

Navigating pregnancy and infancy is complex and very taxing. There are many things you need to be aware of at all times. If you are a first-time mother, it can be even more difficult and stressful. There is no one-size-fits-all how-to manual on entering motherhood, but there are helpful resources that exist to help put minds at ease. One of the best resources for those who are busy and do not have time to read a book or attend a class is listening to a podcast. You can play them in the background, on the go, and when you’re multitasking. Let’s take a look at some of the best pregnancy and birth podcasts available, as featured in an article on Big City Moms.

The Birth Hour

This podcast is a saving grace for those who are interested in everything related to birth stories. There are many experiences told by special guest speakers who have all had to go through the process of giving birth; some examples include giving birth in an RV, delivering breech twins, natural births, water births, and c-sections. Their website provides a quiz on which birth setting might be the best for you. Listeners have described this podcast as extremely helpful, and some have said it opened their eyes up to birthing possibilities they did not consider at first.

Informed Pregnancy

Hosted by doula Dr. Elliot Berlin, this podcast contains large amounts of information that new moms should take into consideration. Berlin is a chiropractic doctor and childbirth educator, so it is safe to say that she definitely knows what she is talking about. One of the best episodes on the show is her interview with Ricki Lake. She delves into a wide range of topics such as birth plans, CPR safety tips, and vaccinations so that moms can keep themselves and their babies safe.

40 Weeks Pregnancy

This podcast might be the coolest on our list. You can listen to an episode of this show every week throughout your pregnancy, and it updates you on what to expect and how to deal with particular challenges you might be experiencing. Each week you can tune in to how your baby is likely developing and how to guide yourself through the journey.

COVID-19’s Potential Impact on Newborns

By Dr. Allen Cherer

On July 6, 2020

In Child Health Care, Neonatal Care, Newborn Screening, Newborns

COVID-19 produces victims of all ages. Concern grows for pregnant women and unborn children. Facilities around the world continue studying the microbe and reveal their findings thus far. Some studies suggest that infants born to mothers having the virus have a high risk of suffering ill effects.

From January 20 to February 5, nine women gave birth to 10 infants in five different hospitals in China’s Hubei province. Eight of the expectant mothers tested positive for COVID-19 before delivery. One mother tested negative. However, a fever and a CT scan of her chest revealed pneumonia that could not be contributed to any other underlying cause but the virus.

The women suffered a variety of prenatal complications that included intrauterine distress, ruptured members prior to the onset of labor, amniotic fluid abnormalities and placenta previa. Seven of the mothers delivered their babies via cesarean section. The other two women had normal vaginal deliveries.

The mothers were treated with Tamiflu or a combination of the antiviral plus interferon following delivery. After birth, all of the infants were tested for COVID-19 via oral swabs. All of the tests were negative. Four of the babies were full-term and six were premature. All of the infants exhibited unusual symptoms that included fevers, difficulty breathing, elevated heart rates, inability to feed, vomiting, gastric bleeding and bloating from liver malfunction. Seven of the infants exhibited abnormal chest X-rays. Two of the premature babies died nine days after birth.

A team of researchers from Northwestern University in Illinois recently discovered that the virus damages the placenta in expectant mothers. The study involved 16 pregnant women who tested positive for COVID-19. Following delivery, the placenta tissues were evaluated. The team discovered that the blood vessels within the placentas exhibited abnormal development or were otherwise damaged. However, all of the infants tested negative for the virus and were in reported good health.

Researchers from the University of California San Diego expanded the MotherToBaby program to gain a better understand the short- and long-term effects of the virus on expectant mothers and infants. Previously, the program was designed to evaluate medications and environmental factors that might affect pregnant women, newborns and breastfeeding.

The study will involve the examination of medical records and phone calls to women who volunteer for the research. The program also includes monitoring the neurological development of children to determine possible emotional, learning or memory issues.

Congenital Hypothyroidism and Newborn Screening

By Dr. Allen Cherer

On April 12, 2017

In Child Health Care, Neonatal Care, Newborn Screening, Newborns

Newborn screening for Congenital Hypothyroidism (CH) is a major public health achievement. Thyroid hormone is essential for the maturation of brain function and somatic growth, and its deficiency early in life can lead to mental retardation. For the fetus, maternal thyroid status is important during the first half of gestation; thereafter, the fetus’ hypothalamus-pituitary-thyroid axis is functional in the normal situation. For the hypothyroid newborn, it is well documented that provision of thyroid hormone is critical during the first weeks of life to avoid severe intellectual impairment. Notably, congenital hypothyroidism is considered one of the most common preventable causes of mental retardation.

Studies showed that affected newborns were rarely identified during the first months of life and were often missed until 1-3 years of age. Congenital hypothyroidism was found to be an ideal candidate with the introduction of dried blood newborn screening by Dussault in Canada. With the development of increasingly sensitive assays to measure thyroid hormone (T4) and thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) using a dried blood spot (DBS), newborn screening programs have developed throughout much of the world. In the 1980s, the incidence of CH in the United States was estimated to be 1:3000-1:4000. More recently, screening programs have reported an increased incidence of 1:1400-1:2800, most probably due to changes in screening strategies and the identification of milder cases.

Typically, newborn screening requires a heel stick blood specimen obtained at 48-72 hrs of life prior to an infant’s discharge from the hospital. Most current assays measure TSH alone as an indicator of thyroid function. Results above established cutoff levels generally signify thyroid gland dysfunction and indicate further testing. Although most helpful in early identification of term newborns with anatomic or functional thyroid gland abnormalities, the screening does miss a percentage of newborns, for example those with central hypothyroidism due to hypothalamic-pituitary failure and the increasingly larger group of preterm infants with congenital hypothyroidism who demonstrate delayed elevations in TSH. Numerous questions remain regarding the optimal timing of follow up laboratory studies and even treatment of certain types of newborn thyroid dysfunction.Nevertheless, newborn screening has proved invaluable for the great number of affected newborns.

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends the measurement of TSH in all newborns with the goal that all infants with CH be identified by 2 weeks of age and that effective treatment with thyroid hormone replacement be started such that serum TSH levels less than 5 mIU/L be achieved within 4 weeks of diagnosis. Unfortunately, despite the significant successes following early identification and treatment of newborns with CH, obstacles persist in reaching the Academy’s goals. Screening programs continue to be plagued with the practical problems of screening all newborns, particularly those discharged home early who are lost to recall or lost to follow up altogether. In addition, dried blood specimens are collected or processed improperly. Delays occur with recall of infants with abnormal results and with appropriate referrals for definitive treatment and management. A recent study conducted in Utah and reported at the 86^th Annual Meeting of the American Thyroid Association highlights some of the problems which currently exist. After reviewing the TSH assays of 4394 children under 2 years of age, 48% of initial samples with elevated levels (>20 mIU/L) were obtained after the first 2 weeks of life, 15% of the initial abnormal TSH assays were not retested, and only 34% of those infants with initial elevated TSH assays achieved the goal of TSH < 5 mIU/L within 28 days of the initial assay.

The final message is that it is not enough to rely on the known efficacy of newborn screening for congenital hypothyroidism, but greater vigilance must be exercised to maximize its benefits in the lives of children.

Ehrenkranz J, Butler A, Snow G, Bach P. oral Abstract 19. The Diagnosis and Treatment of Congenital Hypothyroidism in Utah 2006-2015. Presented at: American Thyroid Association Annual Meeting; September 21-25, 2016; Denver, Colorado

Providing Care for Drug-exposed Newborns: Time for the Next Step

By Dr. Allen Cherer

On September 6, 2016

In Child Health Care, Neonatal Care, Newborns, Research

During the years 1999-2013, the amount of prescription opioids dispensed in the United States nearly quadrupled, and since 2000, it is estimated that opioid use during pregnancy has tripled. Notably, the tragic consequences of the extreme availability of such drugs include abuse, physical dependence, and increasingly, death through inadvertent overdose.

In addition, for the individual pregnant woman, a minimum of two lives is affected: her own and that of her unborn child. The prevalence of prenatally exposed newborns to one or more illicit drugs approximates 6%. Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome (NAS) refers to the withdrawal symptoms from physical dependence experienced by the newborn exposed during pregnancy generally to illicit drugs, prescribed drugs, or to those opioids employed in medication-assisted treatment of maternal opioid addiction.

Withdrawal symptoms can vary markedly in terms of time of onset and severity but typically manifest as tremulousness, agitation, sleeplessness, and poor feeding. NAS increased threefold from 2000-2009 and frequently requires prolonged newborn hospitalization. It has been reported that aggregate hospital charges for NAS increased from 732 million dollars to 1.5 billion dollars with approximately 80% attributed to state Medicaid programs in 2012. Clearly, NAS is a costly public health problem resulting in significant human suffering and expense.

Traditionally, infants who are known to be at risk for NAS have been monitored in the postpartum unit after birth for at least 96 hours and withdrawal symptoms scored based on the Finnegan Scale developed in the mid 1970’s. Typically, if the scores exceed certain values, the newborn is admitted to a Special Care Unit where pharmacologic treatment is frequently started. As withdrawal symptoms subside, dosing is gradually tapered and ultimately stopped. The newborn is observed off medication and monitored for recurrence of disabling withdrawal symptoms. The entire process can generally result in a prolonged Special Care Unit hospital stay of 2-10 weeks.

With the seemingly overnight explosion in the number of newborns demonstrating withdrawal symptoms in the early 2000’s, medical caregivers and hospitals were caught off-guard. On short notice, staff addiction education, medication and weaning protocols, general care policies, and hospital space allocation were required. After a number of years of concerted, collaborative work, much has been learned and achieved in improving the care of the substance-exposed infant.

Nevertheless, pharmacologic treatment continues to require prolonged hospital stays, often in costly Special Care Units. In addition, it effectively excludes full participation by the eventual sole primary caregivers, ideally the parents. It is with these disturbing issues in mind that it is refreshing to note the work and studies over the past several years to further optimize the care provided to infants with NAS and their families.

One of the earlier studies to suggest the therapeutic benefits of a different approach to caring for the drug-exposed infant was that of Abrahams et al. published in the Canadian Family Physician in 2007. During the same period of frenzy involving inpatient hospital transfers, guaranteeing interobserver scoring reliability, pharmacologic treatment protocols, and nursing care directives, the Canadian group with extensive previous experience in addiction medicine reported in a retrospective cohort study the benefits of a rooming-in policy whereby infants remained with their mothers as primary caretakers.

They noted that infants who roomed-in were less likely to require pharmacologic therapy for withdrawal and more likely to be discharged to mother’s care compared to infant’s who received standard nursery care. Subsequently, other retrospective cohort studies both in Europe and the United States demonstrated equally beneficial effects of rooming-in regarding decreased requirement for pharmacologic therapy and decreased duration of hospital stay.

Most recently, the results of a quality collaborative project from the Children’s Hospital at Dartmouth Hitchcock were described in the May, 2016 Pediatrics and demonstrated the beneficial effects of combined standardized protocols and family-centered care in the management of the drug-exposed infant. Over time, the project safely reduced the number of infants requiring pharmacologic therapy, average length of stay, and overall hospital costs.

Among others, key drivers to success were prenatal education of family caregivers including expressed expectation that they would provide meaningful rooming-in care, baby-centered NAS scoring including on demand feeding schedules, pharmacologic therapy when necessary with dosing adjustment based on overall infant condition rather than solely Finnegan score and determined by a consistent team, and an infant “snuggler” volunteer program to assist families when times required their absence.

Overall, the project demonstrated that despite many practical obstacles to providing high quality care for drug-exposed newborns and their families in the hospital setting, where there’s a will, there’s a way.

Antenatal Corticosteroid Use for Late Preterm Delivery

By Dr. Allen Cherer

On July 15, 2016

In Child Health Care, Neonatal Care, Research

In 1972, Drs. Liggins and Howie published their landmark study demonstrating that antenatal corticosteroids administered to women 24-36 weeks of gestation reduced the incidence of respiratory distress syndrome and neonatal mortality. Liggins had previously noted that lambs, treated with intrafetal ACTH, cortisol, or dexamethasone, delivered prematurely, and sacrificed, demonstrated partially expanded lungs.

Such alveolar stability was not typically noted until later in gestation. It suggested to Liggins that glucocorticoids might cause premature liberation of surfactant into the alveoli and served as the basis for his study. In the trial, the most significant difference in the incidence of respiratory distress syndrome among those treated vs. not treated with corticosteroids occurred in those gestations less than 32 weeks.

Although those gestations treated between 32 and 37 weeks exhibited a decreased incidence of respiratory distress, the number did not reach statistical significance. Nevertheless, even at that time, Liggins postulated that mechanisms in addition to enhanced surfactant production and release might be responsible for the improved pulmonary function noted in more advanced gestations treated with antenatal corticosteroids.

Interestingly, despite the findings of the initial study and similar results in multiple subsequent studies , the 1994 NIH Consensus report on the effect of corticosteroids for fetal maturation on perinatal outcomes found that only 20% of women who delivered newborns 501-1500 grams received the benefit of antenatal steroids. After a thorough review of available evidence, including 12 year neurodevelopmental follow up showing no adverse outcomes, the Consensus Panel felt the benefits of antenatal administration of corticosteroids vastly outweigh the risks and all fetuses between 24 and 34 weeks gestation at risk of preterm delivery should be considered candidates for antenatal treatment.

Only in those few pregnancies where corticosteroids would have an adverse effect on the mother or delivery was imminent should steroid treatment be withheld. In addition, although Grade 1 evidence existed at the time to support the use of antenatal corticosteroids for gestations greater than 34 weeks, it was judged insufficient to recommend their use.

Since the Consensus statement, the use of antenatal corticosteroid use has become common and has resulted in considerable reduction in mortality and morbidity, as well as total health care costs. In addition, further neurodevelopmental follow up, including the original Auckland steroid trial participants, continues to demonstrate no adverse effects on psychological functioning and health-related quality of life. Other studies have demonstrated a decrease in overall respiratory disease in infants born beyond 34 weeks who had previously been exposed to antenatal corticosteroids when compared to unexposed infants born at similar gestations.

More than 300,000 pregnancies deliver in the late preterm period (34 0/7 – 36 6/7 weeks gestation) each year in the United States. Seventy per cent of Intensive Care Nursery admissions are late preterm newborns. Their increasing numbers and the broad range and severity of respiratory disorders with which they present beg for a re-evaluation of antenatal corticosteroid use in this range of gestations. This is especially appropriate with a better understanding of the multiple actions of corticosteroids as gestation approaches term.

A recent study, titled Antenatal Late Preterm Steroids (ALPS), a Randomized Trial to Reduce Neonatal Respiratory Morbidity, was published in The New England Journal of Medicine in April, 2016. The study enrolled over 2800 women with singleton pregnancies at high risk for late preterm delivery.

The participants were randomized to receive antenatal betamethasone by injection or a matching placebo. Greater than 80% of women in the trial delivered prior to 37 weeks gestation. The primary outcome was a neonatal composite of treatment in the first 72 hours (CPAP or High Flow Nasal Cannula for at least 2 hours, supplemental oxygen with fraction of inspired oxygen of at least 0.3 for at least 4 hours, mechanical ventilation, or ECMO) or stillbirth or neonatal death within 72 hours of birth.

The study found a significant decrease in neonatal respiratory complications in the group given the steroid treatment (11.6% vs. 14.4%). In addition, severe respiratory complications occurred significantly less frequently in the betamethasone group. The incidence of neonatal hypoglycemia was increased in those treated with betamethasone (24% vs. 14.9%), but no other adverse neonatal outcomes were noted between the groups.

The study is authoritative due to its size, generalizability, and methodologic rigor. Although the issue of long term follow up cannot be specifically addressed, follow up studies of similar treatment in earlier gestations are reassuring. Late preterm births comprise a high risk group for hypoglycemia regardless of maternal antenatal steroid treatment and warrant vigilant monitoring during the newborn period. In sum, the findings of the Antental Late Preterm Steroids study are consistent with other randomized controlled trials of antenatal corticosteroids administered at gestations less than 34 weeks.

Both the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology with an endorsement by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine have addressed and published recommendations based on the study’s findings. Although the recommendations do not establish exclusive standards of care, the organizations approve the use of antenatal corticosteroids in certain defined late preterm pregnancies. It is only with thoughtful application of the recommendations and further studies that the efficacy and safety of antenatal steroids in the late preterm pregnancy will be realized. It is a significant start.

Newborn Screening and Severe Combined Immune Deficiency

By Dr. Allen Cherer

On May 15, 2016

In Child Health Care, Neonatal Care

April (April 22-29) has been designated as National Primary Immunodeficiency Awareness Month and provides an opportunity to better understand the more than 250 rare, genetic disorders in which the body’s normal immune system is absent or functions improperly. Since an important function of the immune system is to protect against infection, patients with primary immune deficiency have an increased susceptibility to infection.

Severe Combined Immune Deficiency (SCID), popularized in the 1976 movie “The Boy in the Plastic Bubble”, is generally considered to be the most serious of the primary immunodeficiencies. There are at least 13 different genetic defects that can cause the disease; all of which are present at birth, involve missing T lymphocytes which are important in identifying and attacking perceived “invaders”, and affect the function of B lymphocytes which produce antibodies against infection.

The absence of T lymphocytes and antibody immunity results in severe infections, diarrhea, and failure to thrive. Regardless of the genetics, patients invariably succumb to an early death due to overwhelming infection. New approaches to diagnosis and management have changed what at one time was a dismal prognosis.

Treatment options have come a long way over the past 4 decades and include enzyme replacement, bone marrow transplant, and gene therapy. Paramount to this change is early diagnosis before the infant has had a chance to develop any serious infections.

The most effective therapy to date is immune reconstitution via stem cell transplant which has been shown to be highly successful (94%) if performed by 3.5 months of age. Hence, timing is crucial in terms of diagnosis and treatment.

Typically, infants with SCID appear totally normal at birth and have no family history of immunodeficiency. In the past, patients were primarily identified either by previous family history, physical manifestations, or after onset of life-threatening infection. Early identification of SCID has been achieved through the use of the 7-cell receptor excision circle (TREC) assay as part of the routine newborn screening program.

Absent or low TREC levels can indicate insufficient T lymphocyte production characteristic of SCID, as well as low T lymphocyte, non-SCID conditions as seen in DiGeorge Syndrome, Trisomy 21, CHARGE Syndrome, and ataxia telangiectasia. On May 21, 2010, The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recommended that every state include the assay as part of the newborn screen.

In the landmark study based on retrospective data on more than 3 million infants from 11 newborn screening programs using the TREC methodology conducted by Jennifer Puck, MD and colleagues and published August 20, 2014 in The Journal of the American Medical Association, the value of early detection and treatment of SCID was confirmed.

In addition, the study found an incidence rate almost twice as great (1 in 58,000 births) as had been previously estimated. Since the point of newborn screening is to identify conditions for which early treatment is life-saving, the study was a crucial step in the adoption of universal screening.

As of April 1, 2016, all, except for 11, states have adopted routine newborn screening programs for SCID. A 2016 study published in the Journal of Pediatrics by Ding and others provided an eloquent cost-benefit analysis of newborn screening in the treatment of Severe Combined Immune Deficiency.

Based on data obtained from 86,000 infants in Washington state, the study showed that newborn screening for SCID is clearly cost-effective. Hopefully, the study provides additional support in economic terms for the adoption of universal screening programs in all 50 states.

Reflections on Cesarean Section Rates

By Dr. Allen Cherer

On May 9, 2016

In Child Health Care, Neonatal Care

Cesarean section delivery is among the most common surgical procedures. It is estimated that in 2012 alone, over 22 million cesarean deliveries were performed worldwide. Data from the National Vital Statistics show that the total cesarean section rate in the U.S. in 1996 was approximately 21%.

Since that time, there has been a rapid increase in the rate, such that in 2011, close to 1 in 3 mothers delivered by cesarean. Although the rate has leveled since then, there remains no evidence that such a significant increase has been accompanied by a concomitant decrease in maternal or neonatal mortality.

Although cesarean delivery can be life-saving for the fetus, the mother, or both in certain cases, the concern exists that cesarean delivery is overused. Hence, the matter is a global health issue. Since one of the main driving forces for the increased total cesarean rate has been a marked shift to repeat cesarean delivery following a previous primary cesarean section, a concerted effort over the past several years has been to examine closely the factors related to the safe management of the nulliparous pregnancy.

As early as 1985, the World Health Organization (WHO) stated there was no justification for any region to have a cesarean delivery rate greater than 10-15 /100 live births. Nevertheless, the rates continued to increase worldwide with no scientific evidence indicative of substantial maternal or perinatal benefit.

In fact, a number of studies have associated higher rates of cesarean deliveries with negative consequences, including increased maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality as well as increased consumption of limited health resources by procedures without medical indications.

In March 2014, a consensus report was issued by the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine on the safe prevention of the primary cesarean section. Among other points, it addressed management guidelines for the most frequent indications for primary cesarean deliveries, namely, labor dystocia, abnormal or indeterminate fetal heart rate tracing, fetal malpresentation, multiple gestation, and suspected macrosomia.

The report encouraged obstetricians to allow more time to progress through a vaginal delivery without intervention, recommended improved and standardized fetal heart rate interpretation and management, and advocated access to non-medical interventionsduring labor, such as continuous labor and delivery support.

A study by researchers at Harvard Medical School and the Stanford University School of Medicine published December 2015 in The Journal of the American Medical Association suggested that based on analyses of cesarean section rates and maternal and neonatal outcomes among 194 WHO member countries the ideal rate of childbirth by cesarean section approximates 19% of all births as opposed tothe previously considered optimal rate of 10-15%. Although the finding is higher than the former target, it remains significantly lower than the current rate in U.S. hospitals.

In its April 2015 position statement on cesarean delivery, the WHO moved away from any target rate. Rather, it emphasized that every effort should be made to ensure cesarean sections are provided to the women in need and only be performed when medically necessary.

It is gratifying that the concept of “target rate” is no longer tied to the delivery of quality medical care. Primarily due to the lack of a consistent classification system to monitor and compare different obstetric profiles, meaningful data relative to cesarean section rates is missing.

It is only when such systems as the Robson Ten Group Classification System are widely adopted by institutions that valid “risk-adjusted”cesarean section rates can potentially be developed and comparisons be made between institutions, regions, and countries.

Physical Trauma and Pregnancy

By Dr. Allen Cherer

On February 20, 2016

In Neonatal Care

Trauma is an important cause of maternal and fetal morbidity and mortality, and blunt abdominal trauma is a particular concern. Approximately 8% of pregnant women sustain some form of traumatic injury. Automobile accidents and falls account for most of the injuries.

Studies of pregnant women involved in automobile accidents have demonstrated increased rates of premature rupture of membranes, placental abruption, preterm birth, and stillbirth. A recent study examines pregnancies complicated by traumatic injuries and outcomes in relation to place of triage.

According to the retrospective study published in the Journal of the American College of Surgeons, pregnant women who sustained traumatic injuries and were triaged to trauma centers experienced improved pregnancy outcomes compared to women cared for in non-trauma hospitals. For the study, the researchers linked two databases, the Washington State Birth Events Records Database and the Comprehensive Hospital Abstract Recording System.

The method allowed them to assess the maternal and neonatal outcomes of all injured, pregnant women (3429 patients) who were hospitalized in Washington State between the years 1995 and 2012. The findings showed that after adjusting for a number of confounding factors, including injury severity score, pregnant women who were cared for in trauma facilities had better outcomes with significantly decreased odds of preterm labor, preterm birth, and low birth weight infants.

Since trauma centers are specialized medical facilities which have optimal processes and resources in place to monitor and treat injured patients, the study suggests that many injured, pregnant women may in fact be under-triaged and treated in non-trauma hospitals where their care may not be optimal.

According to the coauthors, John Distelhorst, DO, MPH and Vijay Krishnamoorthy, MD, the findings may lead to further analyses of state trauma systems and the triage of specific patient populations to improve quality of care and patient outcomes. To read more about this, please visit this site.

Approaching a Birth Plan

By Dr. Allen Cherer

On February 14, 2016

In Neonatal Care

Pregnancy is an exciting time for expectant parents, and childbirth is a miraculous event. Nevertheless,due to the innate unknowns, it can result in considerable anxiety and sense of loss of control. One means of combating these feelings is through thoughtful preparation of a birth plan based on realistic and trustful communication among all the parties who will be involved.

Since the early Roman period, pregnant women in labor had been attended by friends, relatives, or others experienced in aiding with childbirth. As time progressed, the management of the laboring woman became more involved and the advancement of technologies to better monitor the unborn child and the mother required a change in the birth place and the sophistication of the caregivers.

Currently,the vast majority (>98%) of deliveries in the U.S. occur in the hospital setting and are attended by midwives or physicians. In association with these changes came the option of operative delivery (cesarean section) which in 2012 accounted for close to 30% of all births in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Cesarean sections are known to be medically indicated for a number of reasons to safeguard the well being of baby and/or mother.

At the same time, for most pregnancies that are low risk, cesarean section may pose greater risks than vaginal delivery, especially risks related to future pregnancies. Due to the recent rapid increase in the cesarean section rate and concerns that operative delivery is overused without clear evidence of improved maternal or newborn outcomes, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) issued in 2014 new recommendations targeted at preventing women from having cesarean sections with their first birth and at decreasing the national cesarean rate.

Pain management is a significant component of the birth plan. Although most mothers report only mild discomfort during early labor, as contractions become stronger, longer, and more frequent, pain intensifies and may require relief with either spinal or epidural anesthesia.

Although the medications are generally considered safe, very rare complications can occur. For those women opting for a more natural childbirth, the participation in a yoga program during pregnancy or the use of hypnosis have been described.

Whatever birth plan is developed for an individual pregnancy, it should always be tempered based onthe saying “the best laid plans of mice and men often go awry”. The overriding goal should always be a safe birth for both mother and baby. If communication and trust exist among all parties, childbirth can be a magnificent process.