Waiting to Cut the Cord Better, says Study
March 21, 2007 by kate baggott
Filed under Baby Care, Labor & Delivery
On overview of 15 studies released by the McMaster University School of Midwifery researchers and published in the Journal of the American Medical Association has reignited an old childbirth argument.
The overview holds that after the baby is delivered, birth attendants should wait until after the umbilical cord stops pulsing before clamping and cutting it. This enables more iron-rich, nutrient-filled blood to flow into the infant and prevent anemia.
According to a quote in an article about the study that appeared in the Globe and Mail, later clamping will primarily help infants in developing countries where anemia is common, but will give babies in the developed world a boost too.
The point of contention is that early-clamping has it’s proponents too. Cutting the cord as quickly as possible, they contend, helps to deliver the placenta and prevents polycythemia, a condition where the blood becomes too thick to flow properly.
To enable late clamping and cutting, birth attendants would have to wait 10 to 20 minutes after delivery for the cord to stop pulsing.
Researchers Eileen Hutton and co-author Eman Hassan (both from the school of midwifery) believe that the evidence illustrates a significant lowering of anemia rates in babies whose cords were clamped later and no increased risk of polycythemia.
Very interesting. Both my girls had low hemoglobin levels at 9 months. I wish I’d known about this when I gave birth!
That’s why this bone of contention is so interesting. If you’d delivered with a midwife, you’d know they prefer to wait until the cord stops pulsing while doctors generally prefer to do it immediately so they can deliver the placenta and get out.
However, if you clamp later, you can’t bank the cord blood which is a consideration if your family has genetic diseases that might eventually be treated with stem cell therapy.