Sentences with phrase «started labour in»

Infants of women who were referred to secondary care during labour had a 3.66 times higher risk of delivery related perinatal death than did infants of women who started labour in secondary care (relative risk 3.66, 1.58 to 8.46)...

Not exact matches

So if you have a work habit you've been meaning to start with the best of intentions — getting in earlier, whipping your inbox into shape, getting up from your desk for an hourly stretch — the day after Labour Day is a better time to start than most.

It started with customers asking about the labour and environmental conditions in the locations JQI sources from — not only are there regulations to honour, but consumers are increasingly demanding that food brands treat workers fairly and, in the case of produce, not use pesticides excessively.

«As soon as the labour disputes started, the inquiries started coming in,» says Wood, «and it hasn't stopped.»

Besides, as Izzo notes, if you look at labour market trends, the U.S. has been adding 180,000 news jobs a month since the latest round of tapering started in September 2012, compared to 130,000 in the prior six months.

The recent improvement in start - up activity despite a relatively healthy labour market indicates that a significant number of new entrepreneurs chose self - employment as a career rather than being forced to open a business due to a lack of other employment opportunities.

Admittedly, 3,000 jobs is peanuts in the U.S. labour market, but, as the chart below shows, the federal layoffs mean that Washington is starting to be a drag on employment growth just as state and local governments are beginning to recover (blue is the federal government; green is state government; red means local government; and private sector employment, excluding farm employees, is orange).

The talks in Tokyo starting Monday are expected to iron out technical differences on rules for the treatment of labour and intellectual property but unlikely to yield a conclusive statement that member countries will quickly sign the pact.

Table 4 in the MPR shows that retail sales, housing starts and labour markets are showing solid strength outside of the energy - intensive provinces.

Demographics are indicating more university spaces becoming avaialble over next 8 years (already started in eastern Canada) as well as labour shortages for younger people (Foote) and generally better things ahead using same arguments by Dent.lt looks like we are headed for BOOM times which will really get going by 2020.

As a young company, Gildan benefited from being in Canada, receiving government subsidies, and, when it hit a rough patch during the»90s, even borrowing from Quebec's labour - sponsored fund, the Fonds de solidarité FTQ, which invested $ 3.5 million in Gildan shares starting in 1996 and lent the company up to $ 30 million in debentures.

Then an expected agreement on the start of free trade talks with China did not materialize during Justin Trudeau's Beijing visit earlier this week, blocked by Chinese objections to including «progressive elements,» such as labour and gender rights, in the negotiations.

Growth in non-farm GDP per hour worked — a broad measure of labour productivity — has averaged 1.8 per cent per annum since the start of the recovery, a higher rate than in the corresponding phase of the previous cycle, but slightly lower than in the 1970s cycle.

No matter how well play, when it all seems that all Is going well in our team, injury will somehow someway striker a key player and from that moments, other key players starts over labouring themselves and ended up injured as well.

Unlike what you see on television, a woman's water breaking as the sign that labour is starting only happens in approximately 5 % of cases.

... [T] here was a significant excess of the primary outcome in births planned at home compared with those planned in obstetric units in the restricted group of women without complicating conditions at the start of care in labour.

Infants of pregnant women at low risk had a significantly higher risk of delivery related perinatal death (relative risk 2.33, 1.12 to 4.83), compared with infants of women at high risk whose labour started in secondary care under the supervision of an obstetrician.

During labour, the baby's heart rate will be monitored closely (this is known as foetal heart monitoring); there may be changes in the baby's heart rate if the baby starts to become distressed; if this is the case, the midwife may try to speed up the labour so that the baby can be delivered quickly.

I ended #WorldDoulaWeek the same way in which I started it; at a labouring woman's side.

The World Health Organization says, «We define normal birth as: spontaneous in onset, low - risk at the start of labour and remaining so throughout labour and delivery.

'' Normal births» * for healthy women with low risk pregnancies by their planned place of birth at start of care in labour.

Stillbirths occurring before the start of care in labour were excluded.

When I qualified, a staff midwife started as an E-grade; to be a community midwife, you needed an F, which meant acquiring skills such as suturing, cannulation, scrubbing in theatre, and being in charge of the labour ward if no G - grade were available.

The strength of this association was increased when the sample was restricted to women with no complicating conditions at the start of care in labour (adjusted odds ratio 2.80, 1.59 to 4.92).

For the restricted sample of women without any complicating conditions at the start of care in labour, the odds of a primary outcome event were higher for births planned at home compared with planned obstetric unit births (adjusted odds ratio 1.59, 95 % confidence interval 1.01 to 2.52) but there was no evidence of a difference for either freestanding or alongside midwifery units compared with obstetric units.

Categorised by parity for all women and restricted to those without complicating conditions at start of care in labour

* induction of labour (starting your labour artificially) * augmentation of labour (speeding up your labour) * artificial rupture of the membranes (ARM) * using medication for pain relief * electronic fetal monitoring — external CTG or internal fetal scalp * managed third stage of labour (delivering the placenta) * coached pushing * restricted birthing positions * immediate cord clamping * seperation of mother and baby in surgery / recovery

Objective To compare perinatal outcomes, maternal outcomes, and interventions in labour by planned place of birth at the start of care in labour for women with low risk pregnancies.

Transfers during labour or immediately after birth among healthy women with low risk pregnancies by their planned place of birth at start of care in labour.

Results for all women and restricted to those without complicating conditions at start of care in labour

Main outcome measure A composite primary outcome of perinatal mortality and intrapartum related neonatal morbidities (stillbirth after start of care in labour, early neonatal death, neonatal encephalopathy, meconium aspiration syndrome, brachial plexus injury, fractured humerus, or fractured clavicle) was used to compare outcomes by planned place of birth at the start of care in labour (at home, freestanding midwifery units, alongside midwifery units, and obstetric units).

The study was a prospective cohort study with planned place of birth at the start of care in labour as the exposure (home, freestanding midwifery unit, alongside midwifery unit, or obstetric unit).12 Women were included in the group in which they planned to give birth at the start of care in labour regardless of whether they were transferred during labour or immediately after birth.

Before the analysis of the outcomes, the co-investigators and independent advisory group agreed to modify the analysis plan to include additional analyses of outcomes restricted to women without complicating conditions at the start of care in labour.

There were marked differences between planned places of birth in the proportion of women with complicating conditions identified by the attending midwife at the start of care in labour (table 1 ⇑).

There was no difference overall between birth settings in the incidence of the primary outcome (composite of perinatal mortality and intrapartum related neonatal morbidities), but there was a significant excess of the primary outcome in births planned at home compared with those planned in obstetric units in the restricted group of women without complicating conditions at the start of care in labour.

The primary outcome was a composite of perinatal mortality and specific neonatal morbidities: stillbirth after the start of care in labour, early neonatal death, neonatal encephalopathy, meconium aspiration syndrome, brachial plexus injury, fractured humerus, and fractured clavicle.13 This composite measure was designed to capture outcomes that may be related to the quality of intrapartum care, including morbidities associated with intrapartum asphyxia and birth trauma.

The strengths of the study include the ability to compare outcomes by the woman's planned place of birth at the start of care in labour, the high participation of midwifery units and trusts in England, the large sample size and statistical power to detect clinically important differences in adverse perinatal outcomes, the minimisation of selection bias through achievement of a high response rate and absence of self selection bias due to non-consent, the ability to compare groups that were similar in terms of identified clinical risk (according to current clinical guidelines) and to further increase the comparability of the groups by conducting an additional analysis restricted to women with no complicating conditions identified at the start of care in labour, and the ability to control for several important potential confounders.

Characteristics of healthy women with low risk pregnancies by their planned place of birth at start of care in labour.

The overall test for interaction (heterogeneity) was of borderline statistical significance for all women (P = 0.06), and was significant for women with no complicating conditions at the start of care in labour (P = 0.03).

Disappointed by the medicalisation of birth and unnecessary intervention in hospitals, where labouring women were made to lie on their back, she started to advocate the use of movement and gravity to help labour and birth.

In the last couple of weeks when you are «due», adjust the clock timer on your hot water tank to heat the water (even on «sink») regularly every 2 - 3 hours so it already ready to start the filling process in early labour, and once you suspect labour has begun you can switch it to «on» and «bath» for the next and ongoing fillIn the last couple of weeks when you are «due», adjust the clock timer on your hot water tank to heat the water (even on «sink») regularly every 2 - 3 hours so it already ready to start the filling process in early labour, and once you suspect labour has begun you can switch it to «on» and «bath» for the next and ongoing fillin early labour, and once you suspect labour has begun you can switch it to «on» and «bath» for the next and ongoing fills.

When the phone call came at four in the morning I knew it would be Roxanna calling to let me know that the labour had started.

I was told to come to Mount Carmel hospital at 8 am on the morning which I did, I was examined and was told I was 2 cm dilated so I had started labour naturally, my consultant broke my waters this time though it was explained to me exactly what was going on by the most wonderful midwife in the world, Karen..

For some, this means a few hours in the bath at the start of their labour, and for others it means delivering their babies in a birthing pool.

Planned birth at home in low risk women without complicating conditions at the start of care in labour was associated with significant cost savings and a significant decrease in adverse perinatal outcomes avoided.

In further analyses restricted to women without complicating conditions at the start of care in labour, the adjusted odds of adverse perinatal outcomes were higher for births planned at home compared with those planned in obstetric units (adjusted odds ratio 1.59, 95 % confidence interval 1.01 to 2.52In further analyses restricted to women without complicating conditions at the start of care in labour, the adjusted odds of adverse perinatal outcomes were higher for births planned at home compared with those planned in obstetric units (adjusted odds ratio 1.59, 95 % confidence interval 1.01 to 2.52in labour, the adjusted odds of adverse perinatal outcomes were higher for births planned at home compared with those planned in obstetric units (adjusted odds ratio 1.59, 95 % confidence interval 1.01 to 2.52in obstetric units (adjusted odds ratio 1.59, 95 % confidence interval 1.01 to 2.52).

Fig 2 Cost effectiveness plane: planned birth at home compared with planned birth in obstetric units for nulliparous low risk women without complicating conditions at start of care in labour

For low risk women without complicating conditions at the start of care in labour, the mean incremental cost effectiveness ratios associated with switches from planned birth in obstetric unit to non-obstetric unit settings fell in the south west quadrant of the cost effectiveness plane (representing, on average, reduced costs and worse outcomes).25 The mean incremental cost effectiveness ratios ranged from # 143382 (alongside midwifery units) to # 497595 (home)(table 4 ⇓).

Restriction of the analyses to low risk women without complicating conditions at the start of care in labour narrowed the cost differences between planned places of birth: total mean costs were # 1511 for an obstetric unit, # 1426 for an alongside midwifery unit, # 1405 for a free standing midwifery unit, and for # 1027 the home (table 2 ⇓).

Profiles of resource use, and their associated unit costs, for each planned place of birth are reported in detail in appendices 1 and 2 on bmj.com.25 The total mean costs per low risk woman planning birth in the various settings at the start of care in labour were # 1631 ($ 1950, $ 2603) for an obstetric unit, # 1461 ($ 1747, $ 2332) for an alongside midwifery unit, # 1435 ($ 1715, $ 2290) for a free standing midwifery unit, and # 1067 ($ 1274, $ 1701) for the home (table 1 ⇓).