Prophylactic pit is just part of that package of “Active Management of Thirds Stage of Labor” (AMTSL) and there’s a really great analysis of that concept and its consequences in “Optimal Care in Childbirth” Romano and Goer’s great book. They contend, and studies agree, that the medical model of birth…induction and pit to augment labor and other protocols…are modifiable causes of PPH (Post Partum Hemorrhage), and all woman do not just bleed to death after birthing their babies.
We know that docs think that medical intervention is always the answer to a problem… never the cause. I quote from the Goer/Romano book “…research fails to provide ANY evidence that universal application of AMTSL results in clinically important improvements in maternal outcomes in developed countries, while documenting that it introduces harms” (p379).
In 2010, Cochrane reviewers raised many issues about the trade-offs between the benefits and harms of managing third stage, including worries about prophylactic pit for all women regardless of their risk profile. The key phrase for looking at PPH is, I think, “developed” countries. 99% of deaths due to hemorrhage are in undeveloped and developing countries (says the WHO) , and pit has had great success in the prevention and treatment of PPH in low-resource countries.
But here in the US and in other high-resource settings, AMTSL “ conferred no benefit other than a small absolute reduction in transfusion rates, but findings show that transfusion rates are not an objective measure”, (Goer/Romano p379), because of the biases found in decisions about the administration of transfusion and the lack of standardization as to when to treat. Here, where we have the best medical resources (badly used and badly distributed, no doubt), a pit shot for every woman is overkill, unnecessary for the healthy mother, takes the place of her own highest-ever levels of natural oxytocin, upsets the beneficent cocktail of post birth hormones the high levels that nature provides for the most successful and joyous first minutes and hours with her newborn.
During a c-section, the mother may lose as much as 1000ml of blood, and that’s not enough to make docs call for a transfusion, but the standard for vaginal birth is only 500ml, and one wonders how they can tell how much blood loss there really is, when much of what a woman loses may be absorbed in the chux pads under and around her.
The Cochrane says” Women should be given information on the benefits and harms of both methods to support informed choice. Given the concerns about early cord clamping and the potential adverse effects of some uterotonics, it is critical now to look at the individual components of third-stage management.”
Active versus expectant management for women in the third stage of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011; 11:CD007412 (ISSN: 1469-493X) Begley CM ; Gyte GM ; Devane D ; McGuire W ; Weeks A
School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, 24, D’Olier Street, Dublin, Ireland, Dublin 2.
