Monday, March 31, 2008

Cervical length as C-Section indicator.

Sorry I don't have time to reflect on this. Mainly I find it interesting and am, as yet, without opinion...

Labels:

5 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wonder how it would help women and their care providers to take this measurement. I suppose it depends on why the relationship exists (or might exist) between cervix length and risk for surgical birth. Is there anything proactive that could be done to improve outcomes, or is it simply one more thing for doctors to scare women with? "You have Condition X, so you'll probably end up with a c-section." If it's the latter, it sounds like the measurement would be detrimental to women's care.

1:35 PM  
OpenID Rachel said...

I had a couple of thoughts on this, if you're interested - http://womenshealthnews.wordpress.com/2008/03/28/how-are-a-long-cervix-and-having-a-c-section-related/

12:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

wouldn't this mean that, as c-sections have become more common, women's cervixes (cervii?) have become longer? it would mean something if home birth midwives, who have a really low c-section rate, could also find a correlation.

but then, correlation is not causation - if your cervix is long and you take a long time to dilate, that could make you more likely to receive a c-section in the hospital, but to actually need one? i think not.

meredith

4:51 PM  
Anonymous HelloKitty45 said...

I think it's just another excuse and way to make women fear that they cannot vaginally birth a baby.

6:51 AM  
Blogger mommymichael said...

okay but what about women whose cervix has lengthened because of birth?

i ask because my midwife commented that my cervix felt long at my 6 week pp visit. Honestly, i'm not concerned. I birthed a 9lb baby, and this after becoming pregnant when my first son was only 7 months.

11:33 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home