I have read hundreds of studies that give me confidence to say — no, don't cut the cord right away or no, please only monitor the baby intermitently (
electronic fetal monitors DO NOT statisitically save babies, have a high false positve rate, and are associated with higher rates of pain medication, pitocin, and C section).
Given that
electronic fetal monitoring does not prevent perinatal deaths, «the excess of subsequent deaths caused by the increased risk of caesarean section is a major concern.»
Not exact matches
I hope other parents will understand how
electronic fetal monitoring can prevent a tragic situation like this, that EFM doesn't just show a heartrate, but indicates when a baby is in distress.
The biggest problem being cesarean surgery and operative vaginal births increase when the
electronic fetal monitor is used, but the babies don't
do any better than babies who had their heart rate measured every 15 minutes with a stethoscope.
What is most unsettling is that many of the heart rate abnormalities are easily resolved with simple measures such as position changes, which the mother is hindered from
doing while attached to the
electronic fetal monitor.
He believes we should not extend the use of
electronic fetal monitoring to women at low risk, nor should we continue to use it as often as we currently
do.
But Peter Brocklehurst, Professor of women's health at Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, says «the more we use
electronic fetal monitoring, the more harm we
do, with little evidence of benefit.»