Vitamin K injection...

[Ozziehoffy]

Firstly, mods not sure if this should be here, feel free to move if in the wrong place

Can someone tell me what the vitamin K injection is for with a newborn?? Is it necessary?? I am unsure about what it is - I know my SIL and BIL didn't get it done with their second and had it on their birthplan - which is why I'm asking cos I'm trying to work a bit more of my birthplan out.

[Rouge]

As far as I know its to help clot blood for babies. As their blood doesn't often clot very well up until 8 weeks so they can "bleed out" espeically in the brain I think (someone clarify this one). I think yes it is important. We chose to go for the oral Vit. K as we didn't want any injections straight after birth. Seth didn't mind it orally at all. So it was fine for us. But everyone is different on this subject, some prefer to get it out of the way with an injection whereas we didn't mind having 3 oral doses of Vit. K.

ETA: Ok I'm a bit slow... what caro said LOL!

*hugs*
Cailin

[Ca Plane Pour Moi]

Worth a mention - HDN affects only 1:10'000 babies, and if you have a complication-free birth it's near unheard of. On my birth plan (and after discussion with DH) I have vit K ONLY if forceps or similar are used, or if the birth was felt to be traumatic. We want to avoid as much unnatural intervention as possible!

There have been links with various childhood cancers, but these have not been proved; the studies were all on too small sample sizes.

[Rouge]

Thanks for posting that caro, very interesting. Thats some great info

*hugs*
Cailin

[BellyBelly]

But doesnt it make you wonder why babies are born that way? Why would humans deliberately be born with insuficient Vit K and there be a need for mankind to have to come up with a solution to fix that? You can actually boost your diet in Vit K before birth. Like Ryn said though the risk is very low.

Here's the Cochrane Review for this:

Objectives
To review the evidence from randomized trials in order to determine the effectiveness of vitamin K prophylaxis in the prevention of classic and late HDN. Main questions are: Is one dose of vitamin K, given after birth, able to significantly reduce the incidence of classic and late HDN? Is there a significant difference between the oral route and the intramuscular route in preventing classic and late HDN? Are multiple oral doses of vitamin K, given after birth, able to significantly reduce the incidence of classic and late HDN?

Search strategy
The standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group was used.

Selection criteria
All trials using random or quasi-random patient allocation, in which methods of vitamin K prophylaxis in infants were compared to each other, placebo or no treatment, were included.

Data collection and analysis
Data were extracted independently by each author and were analysed with the standard methods of the Cochrane Collaboration and its Neonatal Review Group, using relative risk, risk difference and weighted mean difference.

Main results
Two eligible randomized trials, each comparing a single dose of intramuscular vitamin K with placebo or nothing, assessed effect on clinical bleeding. One dose of vitamin K reduced clinical bleeding at 1-7 days, including bleeding after circumcision, and improved biochemical indices of coagulation status. Eleven additional eligible randomized trials compared either a single oral dose of vitamin K with placebo or nothing, a single oral with a single intramuscular dose of vitamin K, or three oral doses with a single intramuscular dose. None of these trials assessed clinical bleeding. Oral vitamin K improved biochemical indices of coagulation status at 1-7 days. There was no evidence of a difference between the oral and intramuscular route in effects on biochemical indices of coagulation status. A single oral compared with a single intramuscular dose resulted in lower plasma vitamin K levels at two weeks and one month, whereas a 3-dose oral schedule resulted in higher plasma vitamin K levels at two weeks and at two months than did a single intramuscular dose.

Authors' conclusions
A single dose (1.0 mg) of intramuscular vitamin K after birth is effective in the prevention of classic HDN. Either intramuscular or oral (1.0 mg) vitamin K prophylaxis improves biochemical indices of coagulation status at 1-7 days. Neither intramuscular nor oral vitamin K has been tested in randomized trials with respect to effect on late HDN. Oral vitamin K, either single or multiple dose, has not been tested in randomized trials for its effect on either classic or late HDN.

[Fi]

I hear ya Kelly - but nature didn't intend Drs to shove tongs up our hoohoos and deliver babies either So maybe there is a place for the jab when you have any of the factors listed above.
I actually found the heel p.r.i.c.k. more disturbing than the Vit K. I had that many things hanging out of me, it really wasn't my first concern, and the ward nurse actually had to come to me in the middle of the night (like 3am) to sign the consent as it hadn't been done at my 36w appt.

[Janie]

Great thread guys.....you learn something new every day. Especially if you're on Belly Belly LOL!

Just another thing to research. The more I learn, the more I realise just how little I know about this whole pg/birth/baby business. And I consider myself better-informed than alot of my friends! Thank goodness for BB! Thanks Kelly

ETA what is the heel p r i c k test actually FOR? Showing my ignorance here.....

[Ozziehoffy]

Wow...talk about fill the brain huh...lol. I am assuming that Joshua got the Vit K but man, being 21 and first bub there is so much you have no idea about...he was a c/s bub anyway. So much information. At least now I have an idea of what it actually for!! Thank you so very much

Caro, yes I do immunise.

Fi - PMSL on the shoving tongs up the hoohoo!!! What's the heel p.r.i.c.k. for?? lol how naive do I sound!!!

[Inanna]

Ozzie,
More and more couples are investigating and making informed decisions around the Vit K injection. Many are deciding against it.

None of my own babies have had VitK but it would be accurate to say that the large majority of babies do have it - kinda the "done thing" . However, like the syntocinon injection given to women as routine to "quickly" deliver the placenta it's routine use is being questioned by many.

As Ryn pointed out the risk of HDN is very low and minute in a normal vaginal delivery.

Good luck with your investigations and good on you for seeking out information and making informed choices...

[Janie]

Thanks Shannon!

[Ozziehoffy]

Wow Caro you are great at finding some excellent information. It kinda says what Kelly said - Makes you wonder why they're born that way.

So, does that mean the heel p r i c k test is another one of those things which isn't necessary?? Does it really hurt them (I mean obviously they would feel it)...but does it REALLY hurt??

Sez, I feel the same as you...lol. I know more than my friends, but in fact I still know nothing!! I feel so completely and utterly naive at times and Kelly - Belly Belly is a huge credit to you - there are so many things here that I would never have known to ask or question. There are things which have happened this time which didn't last pg and because of other posts I've had my mind put at ease. Thanks

[Inanna]

[I] My SIL put it into perpective regarding immunizations, would you rather your child come down with any of the diseases immunisation protects against or to get penumocchal menegitis (did anyone see that story on 60minutes ? ) or for them to have a needle that may MAY give them a little cold and or discomfort for a day or so.

One of the things that AP parents (full AP) dont do is immunize and that is one of the things I totally disagree with. I think its selfish for all the other children that are around theirs. I do many AP things myself but that is just not something I would do. or rather not do.

I do not immunize Caro. I think of myself as a very compassionate, intelligent and dilligent supporter of human rights. I have posted about this before and again I will. I have worked in third world countries. I have also sat with a child in its last hours of "preventable illness" in Western Countries - and I have seen first hand more than some the destruction that communicable preventable illness brings.

I have also witnessed reactions to immunisation. My own child had a severe reaction to an immunisation. I know there are other parents here on Belly Belly who have had reactions to immunisation that are far worse than my own childs. Some children have been left with irreversible and permanent damage. Now, I am a scientist so it is conjecture to suppose that these children were perhaps always going to become this way and that perhaps this is all just coincidence. These are all valid arguments. Tell that to the parents of a crumpled child or the parents of a child screaming and writhing with pain and fever.

If it was always "just a little cold" that immunisation left behind then it may be different. I have seen otherwise. So, I think it would be helpful to remember that we all love our babies. We are lionesses and we will protect them to the death. However, parenting is a tough gig. Trust me, to go outside the square and make a choice NOT to immunise is bloody hard.
I am a fence sitter I have seen the worst of times on both sides of the fence. However, when my own baby had an extreme reaction there was no way I was going back for seconds. I was advised not to that it appeared there was some "inherrant and undefinable reaction". Consequently my other children are not vaccinated. My eldest is now at 11 and my son has begun his schedule now at 6.

I am not doing this because I am selfish. I am doing this because I AM a lioness and I will protect my babies and make decisions that I feel are the best. I think we all do.
We all have different paradigms that we operate from. Different histories and different journeys that help to form our own special and unique mindsets.
But selfishness it is not.

I agree with what you are saying Ryn. It is NORMAL for babies to be vit K deficient. INterestingly vitK was conceived when the "birth climate" was one of episiotomies, tying women to the bed and VERY interventionist births. In these types of births vit K *may* play a role. Today we can have choice and in a normal spontaneous vaginal delivery vit K I would suggest is not necessary (in the absence of any other clinical indicators)

We all make choices as parents and we do this out of love and concern for our precious children. As parents I think it's important to support and show compassion for this tough journey.

[Brenda Manning]

Hey you guys have really found out heaps of info, this is what 'informed choice' is all about.
Being informed & then choosing !! GOOD ON YOU !

I believe strongly in choice, but here are the facts from the medical viewpoint:

Konakion (Vit K )
The facts re Vit K & how VERY RARE HDN is are VERY relevent.

A healthy term newborn who has an uncomplicated birth doesn't need artificial vitamins, if he did he'd be born with them (like ears, legs etc, we don't add them on after birth just because they weren't needed in the womb do we ?) I mean we have survived as a human species for how long ? Without this & now we suddenly need it?
The pharmeceutical companies love us all the way to the bank !!!! How come all the homebirth babies (who rarely have Vit K) don't all get HDN, huh ? AND they are largely fully breastfed for minimum of 6 months ( yet we are told breast milk is low in Vit K).
My children didn't have it so I walk the walk. You don't need it if your birth is normal & your infant low risk.
That's why you are requested to consent to administration of this drug, the hospital doesn't want to be sued if there is a problem or a side-effect from it !If you consented to it you have no comeback if there are any complications.

Stick to giving babies drugs they really need, not just the "maybe's".

OK, enough of that, off the soapbox.

HEEL P.r.i..c.k or Newborn Screening Test:

Different thing altogether. This is a screeening test to eliminate cystic fibrosis, hypothyroidism & phenylketonuria as diseases your baby may suffer from. The latter 2 are treatable with medication but untreated will cause brain damage.:eek:
CF is incurable but is managed much better if diagnosed early.
You would NOT KNOW that you had " a family history or risk" for these diseases unless you'd had genetic testing. With CF being a recessive gene if you marry a man with the same recessive gene as you (unknowingly carry) you will have a 1 in 4 chance of having an affectd child. You'd want it diagnosed ASAP so you could start a management plan ASAP.
The hospital is required to notify the authorities when couples decline this screening test as it has such devastating consequences if not picked up. They will follow up any couple who choose not to do it at 3 days of age & ensure that they understand how important it is & that it gets done at a later date if possible.

I have found over the years that although this is a heel bleed that if you do it whilst the baby is feeding & collect the blood very gently he will not even notice. Make sure he is well hydrated & has warm feet. Works every time & believe me I've done alot of them.
I think this is an important test & dangerous to leave it out till later as the brain damage will already have occurred in the very early weeks. You aren't giving him a drug, you are just collecting a small amount of blood and you can ask the staff to do it whilst you are feeding if they don't offer to.


Regards Brenda.

[Ca Plane Pour Moi]

Caro... regarding your comment

Why would god allow people the brains to become Dr's and Scientists to come up with vaccinations to cure horrific diseases that used to wipe out populations ?

Before Vit K was introduced there was a higher incedence of problems from this deficency. Now there is less because most babies are given it.

There are lots of things I dont agree with , lots of things that I dont think God intended but then again when he made us and the world he made the brains for us to come up with solutions to fix things And the world has evolved and changed in ways that I am sure HE/SHE never would have imagined

There are far more riskier things that the Vit k injection.

Imo

Personally, I tend to think that God knew what He was doing, just that we don't! Whilst I do think that He gave us the wherewithall to cure diseases (God never intended disease and death: that's all the fall-out from the time of Eden and original sin and thus our own fault), all the extra meddling just causes more problems. Unless I have serious need of intervention, I do not intend to give my child vit K because there's a reason it's not there: just because I don't know the reason doesn't make the point invalid.

I am also going to be vaccinating my babies: I used to love vaccination days when I was little because it was a day off school for the really nasty ones (usually needed for a holiday, too!), and the one-off routine ones meant I got to pick what was for dinner that night!

[Ca Plane Pour Moi]

Vit K "deficiency" is normal in newborns, so therefore I don't want to do anything about it.

Disease is NOT a normal state, so I will prevent it.

Much as I hate the word "normal" (seriously - all the problems in the world come from this word!), there are some things that are the way things are, so we accept them, and there are some things which were never intended, so we prevent them.

[~Saram~]

Hi we decided not to do vitamin K and Hep B injects at birth. Mainly because I think that is a horrible way to enter the world. To say it was frowned upon is an understatement. I recieved many lectures from ped about it mainly because if you don't do the inject bub needs three oral doses 1 on day 1 one on day 5 or 7 I think and then another a week or two later (again I've forgotten the details) and most people don't finish the course. We did and it was fine. The other reasons include additives in the injection of vit K. We chose not to have hep B at birth because DH and I had immunty and were not in a high risk group. Unfortunately my immunity has disappeared with this pg so it looks like this bubba will have to have the jab

[Ca Plane Pour Moi]

Deb, thanks for sharing about the immunisations! I'm very lucky that I've only had mild reactions, if any, but I do know that if my children have any sort of reactions I will certainly be re-considering those immunisations. Oddly enough, my sister had no reaction to those that provoked a reaction in me, and she reacted to one that I didn't even think twice about (save for the sweeties for being a good girl when the needle went in!). I'm also going to try to defer the immunisations for a few months too; i just don't want to stick a needle in a little tiny six week old baby! I certainly won't be giving any injections that I don't have or haven't had first. My body can cope better with a reaction and chances are if I am fine, the children will be, but as you say, taking chances isn't always the best thing.

[Inanna]

Ryn in Australia it is recommended that babies be vaccinated for HepB on day 2-3. This is recommended regardless of social risk factors.
I personally fear this and wonder what we may learn about this in years to come. It seems to me quite obtrusive to give a new born such a vaccine. I can see validity if there are social risk factors of course but for the average "joe blow baby" I have a difficulty with it.

Ryn, I am a person that has had multiple drug reactions (I am an anaesthetists nightmare!) so I was VERY wary prior to taking Ruby for her vaccination. Like you I deferred it but unfortunately she did react and quite remarkably. It is interesting to note that in some countries vaccination is not recommended until a child is 12-18 months for some... This makes sense to me.

LIke I said we all make decisions based on our absolute love and concern for our children. When these decisions are made in an informed and educated manner thay are not selfish just maybe different to the next person...