|
Brought to you by Birth International |
Caesarean birth and MRSA infectionWhile I have been here in the UK over these past three weeks, the issue of MRSA infection in hospital has come up several times in the British press. This infection is present in many units and vigorous efforts are being made at many levels to eradicate it, or at least contain it as far as possible. One hospital I have visited had a stand at the front entrance with dispensers for an antibacterial gel that everyone entering was required to wipe over their hands to kill potential pathogens, and thus keep them out of the hospital environment. I couldn’t help thinking that I would want to use it on the way out as well, so that I didn’t take home one of the hospital’s potentially hazardous bugs! The patients most at risk of an MRSA infection are those undergoing surgery. I wonder how long it will be before those women who are electing to have caesarean surgery are made fully aware of the added risks they are now facing from antibiotic resistant bacteria that they may pick up in hospital? The risk of infection following caesarean births has been known for many years, and has to be balanced against the life-saving potential of caesarean birth when an emergency does occur. However, the possible implications of an elective procedure, especially when a vaginal birth could avoid or reduce the morbidity associated with chronic infection, must be publicised so that women can make informed decisions. Eventually, the presence of antibiotic resistant infections in hospitals may prove to be a selling point for home births. I remember the 1970s, when the advent of rooming-in in maternity hospitals was precipitated by Golden Staph infections found in the central nurseries on the post-natal wards. Maybe this will be another of those pivotal moments, and home will again be seen as a much safer place to give birth than the hospital. I await the first media report along these lines, but I am not holding my breath! Posted by andrea at October 25, 2005 10:29 PM |