Check this out....

**BellyBelly** · October 19th, 2007, 09:34 AM

British Journal of Midwifery , vol 15, no 10, October 2007, pp 612-616 Andrees M; Rankin J - (2007) With the emphasis on minimal or non-intervention in midwifery-led care many midwives are now reviewing their practice towards interventions such as amniotomy. Statistics are presented for over 11 000 women admitted to a midwifery-led unit (MLU) alongside a consultant-led unit resulting in a delivery rate of 89% for normal births, 6% for forcep/vacuum extractions and 5% for emergency LUSCs.

The trend in the use of amniotomy and the changing beliefs of midwives has led to the amniotomy rate reducing from 34% to 14% without affecting the normal delivery rate in the MLU. Birth statistics are presented for 4676 women admitted to the MLU subdivided by parity and related to amniotomy. Fifty per cent of primiparous women delivered in the MLU with an amniotomy rate of 12% resulting in a normal delivery rate of 97% for all parous women admitted. (9 references) (Author)

So, about those masses of emergencies and interventions.... 60-70% c/s rates.... hmmmmm the evidence is overwhelming... but the power of the AMA is also overwhelming.

**Kazbah** · October 19th, 2007, 09:48 AM

What is amniotomy?

**BellyBelly** · October 19th, 2007, 11:29 AM

Artificial rupture of membranes... (breaking of waters) also known as AROM

**Kazbah** · October 19th, 2007, 11:34 PM

Ah, thanks. One of the bubs in our group has scars on her head from the rupturing.

**BellyBelly** · October 19th, 2007, 11:50 PM

Yeah I have heard that too - the main thing I wanted to point out though was that 97% of women in midwifery led care and didn't have their membranes ruptured, had a normal birth. That's only 3% who didn't.... yet we justify the need of interventions like c/s being 30 - even 70% at some hospitals... it's all backwards.