Question for all of you OB nurses. Actually, this may be better answered by those of you who work in the doctor's office...
First of all, when I was pregnant with my son my OB's did not do a Group B strep test, (I just had him back in Feb.), even though I do believe I told them that I had tested positive with my daughter, and was given antibiotics. I guess maybe I should have pushed for them to test me, but for some reason I did not.
Why do you suppose they did not test? Is Group B passed to the baby through lady partsl birth? Did they not test me because I had previously had a cesearean birth, and they were pretty much planning to convince me to have another C section? I had originally wanted to try for a VBAC but it became clear to me as my pregnancy progressed that, while the doctors in the office claimed that they did do VBAC's, they as a group were far from crazy about the idea.
I'm only asking all of this out of curiousity. My son is fine; well except for his laryngomalacia that we are carefully monitoring. A user on another forum posted about a baby she recently cared for with Group B strep who is severely neurologically compromised, and I'm just genuinely curious as to why my provider didn't test me.
I understand your point, and don't disagree with it, but also vividly recall the deaths of 2 babies, one of whom was a full-term, lady partsl delivery with no known risk factors (PROM, maternal temp, etc.) The infant's grandfather was an OB in another area of the country, and threatened to get physical with the OB who delivered his daughter's baby, accusing him of negligent care for NOT screening her or treating for beta-strep. Of course, it wasn't protocol back then, and when asked, he admitted that he didn't screen or treat his patients either.
A large portion of this equation is legal liability. If an OB doesn't treat a strep (+) mother, s/he has no defense in the event of newborn illness. I don't think the lawyers have found a way (yet) to blame individual doctors for antibiotic resistance, even though that probably threatens more patients.
Oh no, I agree with you. I just find the book interesting.
I'm not a big fan of worrying over "false-positives". I'd rather be safe than sorry.
I was taught that the CDC acknowledges that the GBS prophylaxis is at BEST a temporary fix and at worst will cause a catatstrophic problem later with abx resistant GBS infections in newborns/mothers. The problem is no one is trying to come up with another solution. I believe the UKs GBS strep mortality is similar to the use with their risk factor only protocol but no time to look up the numbers. I believe we are creating a hige public health problem.
Spidey's mom, ADN, BSN, RN
11,305 Posts
Oh no, I agree with you. I just find the book interesting.
I'm not a big fan of worrying over "false-positives". I'd rather be safe than sorry.
steph