The issue of skin-to-skin.

photo (3)Atul Gawande  is a general surgeon and researcher from North America. And he writes. And thinks.

I “discovered” him a couple of years ago when I read an article of his in The New Yorker on how medicine takes up new ideas into practice (see links below).

In part of the article he described the efforts of public health workers in India trying to instil the practice of immediate skin-to-skin contact for mothers and babies after birth. The proven power of skin-to-skin contact in reducing infant mortality means it should be a natural activity for birth workers to encourage. And it’s an easy thing to facilitate and encourage in the clinical setting. But still it took time for widespread taking-up of the practice.

Gawande’s conclusion was that people are key in creating change in clinical practice.

Health workers with some clinical skills were employed to visit health care facilities to educate on the importance of the practice and also to make connections with practitioners. Practice is a complicated thing. Clinicians go through many processes in order to change their practice. It is one thing to know what the “evidence” is. It’s another thing to incorporate that into what you do. There may be particular factors which prevent the practice from being carried out, and perhaps most importantly, there may be colleagues who don’t share your priorities.

In the case of skin-to-skin contact, I thought of a few obstructions that might occur in a typical Australian maternity setting:

– the need or expectation that other activities will occur following the birth, such as checking the woman’s perineum, delivering the placenta or checking the baby, which skin-to-skin contact may delay or prevent being carried out.

– the desire of family, friends or health workers to give the mother “a rest” from her baby after what may have been a long and difficult labour.

– the belief that the operating theatre environment is too cold for a newborn baby to be unwrapped.

– the belief that a mother having skin-to-skin contact with her baby on an operating table will interfere with the rest of the caesarean procedure.

– the pressure on labour rooms necessitating the transfer of women who have given birth to postnatal wards as soon as possible.  This might mean that administrative tasks take precedence in the activities following birth.

In fact, many of these obstructions were issues in Indian healthcare facilities too!

Gawande’s conclusion in the Indian situation was that this ongoing person- to- person contact was the most effective means of creating change in practice.  Why?

-It meant that the activity was perceived as a priority (why else have someone dedicated to the task of changing practice?)

-It allowed for the clinician to understand all the reasons for the new activity by discussing it with the health worker.

-It gave local clinicians the opportunity to “own” the activity because they could discuss the particularities of their place of workplace with someone else and adapt their practice in a way that suited their context.

-When the practice was increasingly adopted the results could also be observed by the clinician which then had a positive feedback effect…and so skin-to-skin would become a “standard” feature of post-birth care.

And we haven’t even started to talk about breastfeeding…

 

The New Yorker article: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/07/29/slow-ideas

Atul Gawande’s website: http://atulgawande.com

Advertisements

Maternal and Infant Nutrition and Nurture …oh my!

10 things I learnt and loved about #MAINN2014.

This conference is usually held each year in Grange-over-Sands in the UK, by the University of Central Lancashire. It is a conference dedicated to presenting and discussing research on infant feeding with an emphasis on alternative, contextual approaches to the subject. This year it was held at the University of Western Sydney in Parramatta. These are some of my personal highlights…in no particular order and with ruthless editing to make it digestible to others. Thanks to Virginia Schmied from UWS for making it happen.

1. Exploring the highs and lows of the Baby Friendly Initiative with Fiona Dykes from the UK and Danielle Groleau and Sonia Semenic from Canada. Good to know that there are people interested in the way that health professionals (midwives) live with the 10 steps and the culture of the accreditation.  Fiona spoke about the problems with a “top- down”approach with any behaviour change, but also about the promise of relationships in breastfeeding support.

Sonia spoke about the challenges of introducing the 10 steps into NICU units worldwide: there is a general pre-occupation with infant growth, calories and volume. There are also significant challenges associated with baby illness and feeding. It will be so exciting to see the progress with this work.

Danielle’s work looked at the varied impacts that BFI facilities seemed to have on women’s breastfeeding behaviour in the longer term. She highlighted the  need for more research into the impact of BFI on women from low income groups. She also spoke very clearly about the sociological theory that shines a light on the the problematic issues of breastfeeding cessation amongst women from low income backgrounds and breastfeeding in public. Symbolic capital…mmmm.

2.Renee Flacking reporting on her ethnographic study of four NISC units: 2 in Sweden, 2 in UK. eleven months of fieldwork (phew!).  Her comparison of the different models of care was effective in demonstrating the many benefits of the “womb” model: continuous skin to skin with mother (and/or partner), a separate, private space that allowed families to “focus within”, with the baby as the context.  Interactions between mother and baby “effortless”. Importantly, parents can “be who they are”. Her description of the “standard” nursery care with one uncomfortable chair for mama highlighted the culture in many nurseries of parents being expected to stay an hour or three, but not for longer.

3. Investigations of the impact of peer support for breastfeeding in the UK with Gill Thomson.

Nursing Mothers and the Australian Breastfeeding Association have done this en masse in Australia over the past 50 years. Yup, we reckon it works. Kate Mortensen from ABA is investigating breastfeeding peer support globally and the RUBY study  (Ringing Up about Breastfeeding) will examine the impact of telephone peer support for breastfeeding mums in Melbourne, as presented by Heather Grimes from La Trobe University… it’s already under way.

4. Shanti Raman’s ethnographic study of families in Bangalore,India: “nothing special, everything is normal”. How pregnancy and childbirth is part of the discourse of everyday life in India, and how it is woven into the rich repertoire of celebration and ritual. This resonated with my own experience of providing care for Indian families in Australia… somehow enviable in our culture where pregnancy and childbirth seems so “other”.

5. Gold star to Charlene Thornton for making me like stats!  Her “normal woman” enables effective comparison between care models. Some juicy details: C/S rates, inductions and episiotomy in  private compared to public.

6. Deborah Lupton – renowned health, food and  now digital sociologist.  Enjoyed her quick summary of her own work and directions over the past 20 or so years, with some emphasis on the sociology of risk: “The precious foetus” and more. Mothers place so much pressure on themselves to perform as guardians of their children. Children are both beloved and reviled in our society. Food for thought …

7. Examination of the breast pump discourse: Helene Johns, Kath Ryan and Athena Sheehan. Soft touch indeed. The impact of advertising culture on breastfeeding culture: when breastfeeding comes to equal breastmilk.

8. Talking at meal breaks.  To anyone and everyone – so friendly! What is it about people who do research into breastfeeding and birth? I’d like to think we are uncorrupted by wealth or status!

9. Meeting strangers at dinner. Actually, turned out to be new friends.  This was the kind of conference where, no matter who you spoke to, they were interested and involved in breastfeeding research  and/or clinical practice. Often both. I found out a great deal about what breastfeeding support looks like in Queensland. I also was delighted to share my own plans for research (thanks guys!).

10. Being at UWS in Parramatta. Home of the Whitlam Institute. The campus is an oasis from the traffic and noise of the bustling city.  It’s also a stunning combination of old architecture and new as well as useable and attractive open spaces.  An amazingly culturally diverse community in Parramatta and a calm and beautiful walk each day along the beautiful Parramatta river. Harbour? Who needs a harbour?!

 

images-7