- Share This Post
- Pin It
- 0
- 18
-
Sparkle (0)
A study was released last week that claims laboring women who opt for an epidural to relieve pain are less likely to end up with pelvic floor damage. The news was met with mixed reviews. In fact, the news was delivered in a variety of ways, from the informative to the judgment laden. At the very least, the study got people talking.
The study says that epidural usage may reduce the amount or frequency of pelvic floor damage. According to their findings, such damage can eventually lead to the collapse of pelvic floor organs (called pelvic organ prolapse) and incontinence. They took photos of the mother’s pelvic floor before delivery and three to four months afterward. The numbers favor the epidural.
Of the 488 women in the study, published last week in the British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, about 13 per cent experienced “avulsion,” or tearing, of their “levator,” or pelvic floor muscles. Women who had had an epidural had a lower incidence of tearing. A forceps delivery was associated with the greatest risk of injury.
Of course, the numbers are the bigger issue for some. 488 is hardly a large sampling of laboring women. The study is being called out for that fact in the comments of most posts on the Web right now. With such a small sample, I don't know if I believe the results either. Maybe they couldn't find more women who wanted to have their pelvic flood photographed while a) at their heaviest and b) again shortly after the process of pushing head, shoulders and body of their baby out. Personally, I'd like to see a bigger sampling as well as a study that talks about different positions for laboring and pushing than just your typical in bed stuff.
MidwifeAmy wrote a great piece that delves into the science of birthing more than what I understand, despite birthing three healthy babies. It's basically a must read regarding this issue.
In the case of “levator microtrauma,” there is absolutely no data whatsoever linking the author’s definition of microtrauma to pelvic organ prolapse or other important pelvic floor problems such as incontinence or sexual dysfunction. The aforementioned corporate-sponsored researcher showed in an earlier study that macrotrauma (aka levator avulsion) is an appropriate surrogate for pelvic organ prolapse, but remember that epidurals were not associated with macrotrauma in this study. Forceps deliveries were – and what’s the major modifiable risk factor for forceps delivery? Epidurals!
Interestingly, the senior author of the study replied to MidwifeAmy’s post. A slew of comments, which at times get heated, followed. That heated slew of comments is actually my biggest problem with this study: lack of support for mothers by mothers.
I’ll be honest. I had an epidural when I was induced with my oldest son. For the nosy: My kidney shut down due to chronic unilateral hydronephrosis, and it was either induce or we both die. Easy choice, very difficult labor. (Pitocin = death.) Despite the fact that my induction was medically necessary, I got flack for accepting the induction. I then got flack because I went the epidural route after hours of various positions and attempts to handle the pain on my own. For each thing that went wrong, I got flack. Nevermind the fact that I was just trying to bring my son into the world with the flawed body that I was given. Nevermind the fact that I didn’t want the induction or the epidural. Nevermind the fact that my kidney had simply given up on me, a result of a birth defect not discovered until my previous pregnancy during which I had two surgeries. It was all my fault. And I was a birthing failure.
That’s what Todaysparent suggested with this gem of a tweet.















