GBS & QMH delivery
- Thread starter LdeJ
- Start date
carang
Registered User
i delivered my son by emergency c-section. i had pre-eclampsia and was left on a drip in the delivery suite for the entire night so that i would have a midwife/nurse to care for me. my BP was through the roof. i think he was put upstairs to make sure that my condition hadn't had too much effect on him. i delivered him around 3pm. they brought him to me about 9pm and took him back upstairs about 10pm. they moved me to the ward about lunch time the next day and brought him down to me to stay then.
with my girl, i had similar issues, but i delivered under general anesthesia (so was totally out of it for delivery)... i didn't recover from that for about 24 hours. her apgar responses were slowed because of the GA. her thyroid was having some problems and she was jaundiced. so they kept here there for just over 24 hours.
it really is for the safety of the babies.
sometimes, i feel like they can't win.... if they thought there might be a problem and didn't take action, they would be accused of neglect and mal-practice... if they take the babies upstairs, they get slammed for being overly-cautious.
with my girl, i had similar issues, but i delivered under general anesthesia (so was totally out of it for delivery)... i didn't recover from that for about 24 hours. her apgar responses were slowed because of the GA. her thyroid was having some problems and she was jaundiced. so they kept here there for just over 24 hours.
it really is for the safety of the babies.
sometimes, i feel like they can't win.... if they thought there might be a problem and didn't take action, they would be accused of neglect and mal-practice... if they take the babies upstairs, they get slammed for being overly-cautious.
the are extremely cautious which in terms of the babies health is good. for me nothing is too careful when it is my babies health at stake...though my son was in NICU for 3 weeks with what started out as a simple problem (can't remember the term where babies have to be put under the light cause they're too yellow) and they didn't let him come out because ofthe detection of a low fever, possible signs of meningitis (turned out false), bad kidney and wanting to some medical scan on him (which we decided not to get done cause it was too invasive)...the test was not scheduled till 2 months after the release from hospital since there was a waitlist (and in the meantime we seeked the advice of our pedi. who worked at QMH Nicu for many years and was a kidney specialist - Dr Richard CHiu) and he said no need. anyhow, i know it wasn't a good experience but us as a family but knowing how thorough they are was reassuring in the aftermath.
When I registered at Tsan yuk for the Queen Mary Hospital I received a little book with lots of pamphlets in it. One of them was their policy on breastfeeding and other things happening within the first few hours after birth.
I don't have it here at the moment, but it said something like the following
1. Breastfeeding is encouraged and mothers should try to breastfeed within 1 hour
2. In-rooming is encouraged
3. Body contact straight after birth is encouraged
So I think they are just very cautious in case there is a problem, but otherwise they seem to be pro breastfeeding.
I don't have it here at the moment, but it said something like the following
1. Breastfeeding is encouraged and mothers should try to breastfeed within 1 hour
2. In-rooming is encouraged
3. Body contact straight after birth is encouraged
So I think they are just very cautious in case there is a problem, but otherwise they seem to be pro breastfeeding.
Although it might not seem as if much is happening in the NICU, the staff do very regular observations on the newborns and there is a slew of high tech equipment and personell nearby should a little wee one crash (and this can happen quickly because the newborns have zero to no reserve). Yes its inconvenient to mums and yes with more $$$$$ in the system they could have it so that mums and babies could stay together whilst these obs are being done BUT in a cash strapped, resources/manpower strapped system I think the Queen Mary does really, really well.
Agree with Carang, the hospital just can't win, damned if they don't take the precautions and criticised if they do.....
Agree with Carang, the hospital just can't win, damned if they don't take the precautions and criticised if they do.....
nicolejoy
Registered User
I've got plenty of experience with QMH NICU and honestly I think they do go to the almost damaging point of overly cautious. My daughter was in NICU for 4 months - other babies in the US who were MORE severe than my daughter were out of NICU and home within 2 weeks. There was no change in my daughter's condition between 2 weeks of age and 4 months of age - and the doctors told me she was there pretty much "just in case". When she was in NICU between 2 weeks old and 4 months old, there was nothing that they did there that we could not have done at home. Of course if she took a turn for the worse, we couldn't give her the emergency care that would have been necessary, but she never once needed that.
Also, my daughter's surgery to mend her cleft palate was also delayed more significantly than it should have been. It was finally repaired when she was 22 months old, although in other countries, kids who have similar conditions have their cleft repaired closer to 15 months (slightly delayed from the average 12 months old). Due to the long delay, we are now (at 26 months old) dealing with more significant speech delays than if the cleft had been repaired sooner. (That wasn't a NICU decision, it was a plastic surgery decision).
I'm not saying that they should not take necessary precautions, but over here they take far more precautions than is necessary in my opinion/experience - and there are frequently negative consequences which I feel outweigh the benefits of that gap between "regular-cautious" and "over-cautious".
Ultimately, I would prefer my doctors to be a bit more cautious than average - however the extremes that I've experienced in the system over here are crazy. That said, my situation is not a regular case... but I have seen a common theme occur over and over...
Also, my daughter's surgery to mend her cleft palate was also delayed more significantly than it should have been. It was finally repaired when she was 22 months old, although in other countries, kids who have similar conditions have their cleft repaired closer to 15 months (slightly delayed from the average 12 months old). Due to the long delay, we are now (at 26 months old) dealing with more significant speech delays than if the cleft had been repaired sooner. (That wasn't a NICU decision, it was a plastic surgery decision).
I'm not saying that they should not take necessary precautions, but over here they take far more precautions than is necessary in my opinion/experience - and there are frequently negative consequences which I feel outweigh the benefits of that gap between "regular-cautious" and "over-cautious".
Ultimately, I would prefer my doctors to be a bit more cautious than average - however the extremes that I've experienced in the system over here are crazy. That said, my situation is not a regular case... but I have seen a common theme occur over and over...
Taking a newborn baby from a GBS positive mother "for observation" makes no sense. The chances of a GBS positive mother passing the infection to her baby during birth are:
- 0.5% without IV antibiotics in labour
- 0.025% with IV antibiotics in labour
The risk is extremely low as you can see from these CDC statistics!
There are many other infections a newborn baby is more susceptible to and more likely to contract (e.g. respiratory infection, gastroenteritis, non-GBS meningitis etc.) and by taking the baby away from his mother, his chances are even higher of contracting one of these. A newborn baby in constant skin contact with his mother and receiving her colostrum has better oxygen saturation, a stronger immune system and better stats overall.
So in short, taking a baby from his mother for the 0.5 - 0.025% risk of contracting GBS, is putting the newborn at a very real risk of more likely and more common other infections?
- 0.5% without IV antibiotics in labour
- 0.025% with IV antibiotics in labour
The risk is extremely low as you can see from these CDC statistics!
There are many other infections a newborn baby is more susceptible to and more likely to contract (e.g. respiratory infection, gastroenteritis, non-GBS meningitis etc.) and by taking the baby away from his mother, his chances are even higher of contracting one of these. A newborn baby in constant skin contact with his mother and receiving her colostrum has better oxygen saturation, a stronger immune system and better stats overall.
So in short, taking a baby from his mother for the 0.5 - 0.025% risk of contracting GBS, is putting the newborn at a very real risk of more likely and more common other infections?
Ok so back from QMH: was admitted with 1 minute contractions every 5 minutes for an hour. About 9 hours later my cervix had only dilated by 2cm, baby's heartbeat was "not good" with each contraction and induction was not an option as i had had a previous c-section. Dr said he couldn't see the point in waiting doubted my cervix would open much more so had a c- section about an hour later.
As expected they took baby up for 24 hour observation because of the GBS and because baby was a bit apneic at birth though was immediately stabilized. Was denied my request for immediate skin to skin contacts after birth and for delayed cord clamping.
Was also denied to be taken up in a wheelchair to breast feed baby every 3 hours and had to wait until visiting hours the next day. Was told they would have to supplement or baby would need a drip. Might have been able to see him sooner but Dr decided I wasn't passing enough urine, which I tried to explain was normal as I hadn't been drinking since long before the surgery and don't want to drink too much when I go the go ahead as I was afraid to overload my system. Baby was released after 23 hours observation. We were discharged 44 hours after the operation. Not my ideal birth story but glad to be home with baby.
As expected they took baby up for 24 hour observation because of the GBS and because baby was a bit apneic at birth though was immediately stabilized. Was denied my request for immediate skin to skin contacts after birth and for delayed cord clamping.
Was also denied to be taken up in a wheelchair to breast feed baby every 3 hours and had to wait until visiting hours the next day. Was told they would have to supplement or baby would need a drip. Might have been able to see him sooner but Dr decided I wasn't passing enough urine, which I tried to explain was normal as I hadn't been drinking since long before the surgery and don't want to drink too much when I go the go ahead as I was afraid to overload my system. Baby was released after 23 hours observation. We were discharged 44 hours after the operation. Not my ideal birth story but glad to be home with baby.