Baby it hurts: birth practices and postpartum
pain
November 6th, 2009 by
Amy Romano
Goto
comments
Leave a
comment
Ask a bunch of expectant women what worries them about labor, and chances
are many of them will say, “the pain.” Much is made about pain in
labor. Women prepare for it, nurses constantly assess it, anesthesiology
departments exist to eliminate it, and so on. But while there are many
experiences of labor pain, just about the only universal truth about it
is that labor pain ends once the baby is out.
But a 2008 report from Childbirth Connection suggests that,
for many
women, pain is an ongoing problem after birth. The report also
suggests that two common labor interventions -
cesarean surgery and
episiotomy – are highly associated with ongoing pain.
According to their national survey of mothers, reported in
New
Mothers Speak Out, 22% of mothers who gave birth by cesarean said
that pain interfered “quite a bit” or “extremely” with their daily
activities in the first two months. That’s compared to only 10% of women
who had vaginal births. Mothers who had vaginal births without
episiotomies were the least likely to report that pain interfered at all
with daily living. Episiotomy also increased the likelihood of painful
intercourse in the first two months.
At
six months, nearly 1 in 5 (18%) of mothers who had a cesarean
still experienced pain at the incision site, versus only 2% of women who
had vaginal births reporting continuing problems with perineal
pain.
The Childbirth Connection survey did not ask about
endometriosis,
a common cause of chronic pelvic pain, but a growing number of case
reports strongly suggest that
cesarean surgery is
associated with new-onset endometriosis.
This week I happened upon a
study that
reveals another aspect of labor and birth care that may affect postpartum
pain. Researchers analyzed data from nearly 13,000 UK mothers of
singleton, term, live-born babies. Participants were recruited into the
study prenatally and answered questions about back pain in two postnatal
surveys – one at 8 weeks and another at 8 months. The researchers set out
to find out if mode of birth (spontaneous vaginal, instrumental vaginal,
elective cesarean, or unscheduled cesarean) affected the likelihood of
postpartum back pain. They concluded that it did not.
But here’s an interesting gem that I almost missed [emphasis
mine]:
- A higher proportion of women who had an emergency caesarean section
reported 8-week postnatal back pain compared with those who delivered
spontaneously… Adjusting for the factors associated with emergency
caesarean section and back pain decreased this association. By 8 months,
the prevalence of back pain fell, but remained higher amongst emergency
caesarean sections. Epidural analgesia and ‘in preferred position in
labour’ were the two most influential confounders.
What does this mean? I had to go back to an
earlier study
that reported outcomes from the same dataset in order to figure out what
“in preferred position” was referring to. It turns out researchers
asked women how much of their labor was spent in their preferred labor
position. Options were, “no/hardly,” “sometimes,” or “always.” The
results of this earlier trial showed that being in the preferred position
in labor reduced the risk of cesarean surgery. The fact that the
researchers in the new study controlled for it tells us that being in
one’s preferred position in labor also was protective against postpartum
back pain. It also tells us that having an epidural in labor
increased the likelihood of postpartum back pain, although this finding
has been inconsistent in other studies.
What other labor and birth practices could affect postpartum pain?
What about
skin-to-skin contact after birth? Only
one tiny study
involving only 20 mother/baby pairs has looked at whether skin-to-skin
care affects nipple soreness and it did not find an association. Another
small study (not published but included in the
Cochrane
systematic review) looked at breast engorgement pain and did find
that skin-to-skin contact was protective.
A much larger
body of literature shows that skin-to-skin contact in the hour or so
after birth increases the duration of breastfeeding, which lends
additional support to the possibility that skin-to-skin care reduces
breastfeeding-related pain (a common cause of early weaning).
Another
Cochrane
systematic review tells us that
upright pushing positions are associated with a much lower rate
of episiotomy. Although no study has evaluated pushing position and its
direct effect on postpartum pain, anything that reduces episiotomy will
in turn reduce postpartum perineal pain and painful intercourse.
In the same vein, practices that reduce operative delivery will in turn
reduce postpartum pain associated with these modes of birth. These
practices include
letting labor begin on its own, providing
continuous labor support, and
reducing the use of interventions such as epidural analgesia and
routine continuous electronic fetal monitoring.
It seems to me that we overemphasize the physiologic pain related to
labor and completely ignore the pathological pain related to
interventions and injuries in childbirth, many of which could be
averted. My question to my readers is this: how do we reframe the
conversation about childbirth-related pain to look more holistically at
pain throughout the childbearing year and beyond?
Citations:
Moore ER, Anderson GC, & Bergman N (2007). Early skin-to-skin contact
for mothers and their healthy newborn infants. Cochrane database of
systematic reviews (Online) (3) PMID:
17636727
Gupta JK, & Hofmeyr GJ (2004). Position for women during second stage
of labour. Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) (1) PMID:
14973980
Moore ER, & Anderson GC (2007). Randomized controlled trial of very
early mother-infant skin-to-skin contact and breastfeeding status.
Journal of midwifery & women’s health, 52 (2), 116-25 PMID:
17336817
Patel RR, Peters TJ, & Murphy DJ (2007). Is operative delivery
associated with postnatal back pain at eight weeks and eight months? A
cohort study. Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 86 (11),
1322-7 PMID:
17851815
http://www.scienceandsensibility.org/?p=778