WHO Study on Prematurity

Post a reply

In an effort to prevent automatic submissions, we require that you type the text displayed into the field underneath.
:D :) ;) :( :o :shock: :? 8-) :lol: :x :P :oops: :cry: :evil: :twisted: :roll: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow: :| :mrgreen: :geek: :ugeek:

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review

If you wish to attach one or more files enter the details below.

Expand view Topic review: WHO Study on Prematurity

Re : WHO Study on Prematurity

Post by tree » Sun Oct 04, 2009 10:03 pm

These boards have made me realize how grateful I am that MB was only in the NICU two weeks and came home healthy.
I forgot to excerpt this sentence from the article when I posted it. I find it very encouraging.
"The global health community is focusing renewed attention on maternal-child illness and mortality."

Re : WHO Study on Prematurity

Post by caryn » Sun Oct 04, 2009 07:17 pm

Thanks for posting this. The 34-37 weekers do have those higher rates of jaundice and breathing difficulties, certainly. With preeclamptics, it's just that they often can't *not* be delivered, you know?

Most of the research into theraputics is looking for something we can use to safely delay delivery by 48 hours, so we can get the steroids on board. (I am very grateful to have had *just* enough time for steroids, so that Oscar spent only a week in NICU.)

WHO Study on Prematurity

Post by tree » Sun Oct 04, 2009 07:01 pm

This Washington Post article is interesting, especially the conclusion that "early-term/late pre-term" delivery is not as harmless as many believe it to be. It does support my OB's description of a 35 weeker having some short-term issues and very few long term issues.
The article says 1 in 10 babies are born prematurely world-wide. The follow-up study will address some of the causes next year. I can only assume PE will be a significant contributor.