ReportWire

Tag: brief period

  • A Modest Proposal to Save Mothers’ Lives

    A Modest Proposal to Save Mothers’ Lives

    [ad_1]

    At the busy county hospital where I did my medical residency, we cared for patients with every imaginable problem. But one part of treatment was always the same: As soon as it was deemed medically safe, a physical or occupational therapist would visit each and every patient. In the intensive-care unit, a physical therapist might assist a patient into a sitting position at the edge of the bed. An occupational therapist might help her relearn how to hold a fork after weeks of being fed by a tube. On the general-medical and surgical wards, at least one or two patients could always be found walking the long hallways with a walker or cane, a strong and amiable physical therapist keeping pace beside them, casually asking crucial questions: “Are there any stairs in your home?” “Who does the laundry and cooking?” “Who will be around to help you?”

    But there was one area of the hospital where physical and occupational therapists weren’t involved in patient care: the maternity ward. In many hospitals, this is still true. Although I now work in outpatient OB-GYN care, my colleagues in Labor and Delivery confirm that PT/OT doesn’t have a large presence there. Amy Willats, a nurse-midwife in the San Francisco Bay Area, told me that she orders physical therapy for new mothers only in rare circumstances—“when someone is in so much pain, they can’t walk to the bathroom.” As for occupational therapy, she said, “it’s not even on my radar.”

    Some physical and occupational therapists want this status quo to change. They believe that everyone who gives birth should receive a PT/OT evaluation prior to discharge, with the same goal as for any other hospitalized patient: to prepare them to move around safely and comfortably at home. I remember how easily, in the chaotic world of the hospital, I could overlook the quiet work of physical and occupational therapists. But the extra layer of attention and care they provide could help millions of new mothers recover faster—and may even save lives.

    Pregnant women and new mothers are, in a sense, different from other hospitalized patients. Doctors tend to think of them as healthy young people undergoing a normal, natural process, one that should require serious medical intervention only occasionally. This is how my patients tend to see themselves too—and most of them do go on to live normal, if changed, lives. By this philosophy, what new mothers need isn’t intensive rehab, but a brief period (one or two days) of observation, some education about how to feed and care for their baby, and then a timely discharge home, with a single postpartum visit a few weeks later. Indeed, this laissez-faire approach is the standard of care in many U.S. hospitals.

    But as the U.S. faces a surging maternal-mortality rate, with more than half of maternal deaths occurring after delivery, physicians are now in wide agreement that the standard of care needs to change. Pregnant women in the U.S. are not as young as they once were. Pregnancy and childbirth can present grave dangers—particularly when a woman already has underlying health conditions. A vaginal delivery is an intense physiological event that involves the rapid expansion and then contraction of the musculoskeletal system, along with dramatic shifts in hormones, blood volume, and heart rate. A Cesarean section is a major surgery that involves cutting through layers of skin, fascia, and muscle—and that’s if everything goes perfectly.

    Rebeca Segraves, a Washington State–based doctor of physical therapy specializing in women’s health, told me she was struck early in her career by the realization that women undergoing a C-section did not receive routine postoperative PT. She was used to performing inpatient evaluations for patients recovering from relatively minor illnesses and surgeries, such as pneumonia, gallbladder removal, and prostatectomy. But after a C-section, she says, a PT evaluation “just wasn’t the culture.” She set out to change that.

    For most people, if the phrase postpartum physical therapy calls to mind anything at all, it’s pelvic-floor PT. In the early 2010s, American women living abroad introduced U.S. audiences to the French practice of perineal “reeducation,” a comprehensive exercise regimen prescribed for every postpartum mother and subsidized by the French government, designed to retrain the muscles of the pelvic floor after birth. Since then, U.S. researchers and the popular press have documented the widespread and devastating effects of urinary incontinence, pelvic-organ prolapse, and chronic pelvic pain—issues that can be overlooked or dismissed at the postpartum visit.

    But Segraves is arguing for postpartum PT/OT that goes beyond the pelvic floor. Segraves has developed an approach called “enhanced recovery after delivery” (ERAD), essentially a training program for OB-GYN departments and hospital-based PT/OT staff that encourages an evaluation for every woman after childbirth. ERAD includes an assessment of body mechanics and cardiopulmonary function, gait retraining, infant lifting and lowering techniques, and (in the case of C-section) incision-protection training. Crucially, a therapist also monitors the woman’s bodily responses—such as pain and vital signs—while she practices these simple home activities in the hospital.

    Segraves believes that these interventions could be lifesaving. Warning signs of the major postpartum killers—including preeclampsia, stroke, hemorrhage, and infection—sometimes manifest right away, but in many cases they don’t appear until a woman returns home, where they may go unrecognized. The more attention paid to new mothers in the hospital—particularly while they’re moving around, Segraves argues—the more likely providers are to catch these warning signs.

    As an example, Segraves told me about a patient she met a few years ago who had suffered a third-degree perineal laceration (a particularly severe birth injury) during a vaginal delivery. At the time, Segraves was primarily focused on providing physical therapy after C-sections, but her team advocated for this woman to receive a PT evaluation prior to discharge. When the woman tried to stand and walk, her blood pressure shot to a dangerously high level. Ultimately, the patient was transferred to the ICU and diagnosed with severe preeclampsia.

    Anecdotes like these make a powerful case for universal PT/OT for new mothers. But as yet, there’s no proof that it could affect postpartum outcomes on a large scale. To get this kind of evidence, Segraves will need a clinical trial. So far, she told me, she’s gotten a grant to study physicians’ and therapists’ attitudes toward routine postpartum PT/OT.

    Her research is in the early stages, but my conversations with maternal-care specialists suggest that attitudes are mixed. Olga Ramm, a urogynecologist in the San Francisco Bay Area, told me she worries that PT/OT for all pregnant women could be hard to implement universally, “because so much of it really depends on that interpersonal relationship and connection between the patient and the therapist.” Funding is an issue too: Physical and occupational therapists are licensed professionals whose services aren’t cheap, and many hospitals are already strapped for cash and staff. Adding a PT/OT evaluation for every hospitalized patient “seems like a fairly expensive way” to bolster postpartum services, Ramm said. Willats, the nurse-midwife, agreed. “The way we educate people should change,” she said. “We don’t necessarily need a different group of people to do that education.”

    Then again, physical and occupational therapists may be uniquely positioned to do this work. Unlike doctors, who are usually trained to think about patients as sick or healthy, PTs and OTs are interested in how a person’s body serves her in her daily life—what Segraves calls “roles and routines.” This means seeing a new mother as someone who is about to return home in a changed body, who will need to lift, rock, and soothe a newborn; perform heavy chores such as cleaning and laundry; and perhaps breastfeed that newborn, whose kicking feet land right on a fresh C-section scar. PT/OT is about helping her adapt to all of these changes with intention and care.

    Doctors and patients tend to think of physical therapy as primarily a set of rehab exercises that help a patient recover from an injury. But another way to view PT and OT is as an opportunity, inside the overwhelming world of the hospital, for a skilled professional to see and treat the patient as a whole person. Segraves told me the story of a young woman with a high-risk pregnancy and a prolonged hospital stay, during which baby gifts from friends and family piled up around the room. After several agonizing weeks, she delivered a stillbirth by C-section. A few days later, Segraves watched as an occupational therapist sat by the patient’s side, helping her fold all of those tiny newborn clothes, tucking them neatly back into gift bags for her to take home. At that moment, Segraves said with a touch of awe in her voice, the young woman was “more functional than any of us had seen her up to that point.”

    When I consider this story, I can’t help but recall the therapists strolling the hallways of my residency hospital, asking my patients questions I’d never bothered to address—about their home, their life, their “roles and routines.” Really, the questions they were asking were much deeper—and exactly the ones that are central to new motherhood: How will you manage in this new body, this new life? Who will you be?

    [ad_2]

    Christine Henneberg

    Source link

  • A Rare Reprieve From the Permanent Presidential Campaign

    A Rare Reprieve From the Permanent Presidential Campaign

    [ad_1]

    Does anyone want to be president?

    Typically, by the time a president delivers the State of the Union address at the start of his third year in office, as Joe Biden will on Tuesday, at least half a dozen rivals are already gunning for his job. When Donald Trump began his annual speech to Congress in 2019, four of the Democrats staring back at him inside the House chamber had already declared their presidential candidacies.

    Not so this year. The only Republican (or Democrat, for that matter) officially trying to oust Biden is the former president he defeated in 2020. Trump announced his third White House run in November and then barely bothered to campaign for the next two months before holding relatively small-scale events in New Hampshire and South Carolina in January. Trump will finally get some company next week, when Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor and United Nations ambassador, plans to kick off her campaign in Charleston. More Republicans could soon jump into the presidential pool. But the 2024 campaign has gotten off to a decidedly slow start, and the first weeks of 2023 have brought a rare reprieve from what has become known—with some derision—as the permanent campaign. This pause is not the result of some collective cease-fire; it’s what happens when you have a former president who lost reelection but still inspires fear in his party, along with a Democratic incumbent—the oldest to ever serve—who is not exactly itching to campaign.

    Even New Hampshire—normally one of the first states to welcome would-be presidents—has been subdued. “Other than Trump, I can’t think of a leading person being here for the last couple of months,” Raymond Buckley, the longtime chair of the state’s Democratic Party, told me. He said he’s used the lull to prioritize party building, “instead of constantly focusing on one Republican senator or governor after another.”

    The same is true in Iowa, that other presidential proving ground with a year-round appetite for stump speeches. “It’s pretty quiet on the western front,” David Oman, a Republican strategist and former co-chair of the Iowa state GOP, told me. As my colleague McKay Coppins recently reported, most of the Republicans who want the party to nominate someone other than Trump are, once again, reluctant to actually do anything about it. Trump’s potential GOP rivals have been similarly shy about taking him on; until Haley put out word about her announcement last week, no one in the emerging field—which could include Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, former Vice President Mike Pence, and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, among others—was willing to be the first target of the barrage of insults and invective Trump would surely hurl their way.

    The momentary quietude has dampened any pressure for Biden to shift back into campaign mode, and he’s in no rush anyway. Tuesday’s State of the Union address will likely yield even more performance reviews than usual, as pundits and viewers alike judge the toll that Biden’s advancing age has taken on his oratory. As for the substance of his speech, White House officials told me Biden will continue the project he began months ago: promoting the accomplishments of his first two years in office, especially his bipartisan infrastructure law and the Democrats’ Inflation Reduction Act that he signed last summer.

    In the absence of a fully formed GOP presidential field, Biden has been content to use the new House Republican majority as a foil—adopting a strategy that Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama employed after Democrats lost power in Congress during their first terms. Biden has vowed to protect programs such as Medicare and Social Security from GOP budget cuts; refused to negotiate over the debt ceiling (although the White House said last week he’d entertain “separate” conversations on deficit reduction); and eagerly highlighted ill-fated GOP proposals to replace the federal income tax with a 30 percent national sales tax.

    Yet with Speaker Kevin McCarthy seated behind the president on the House rostrum for the first time, Biden is expected to stress conciliation over confrontation. “The president will once again amplify his belief that Democrats and Republicans can work together,” a White House official told me, speaking anonymously to preview a speech that hasn’t been finalized, “as they did in the last two years and as he is committed to doing with this new Congress to get big things done on behalf of the American people.”

    Biden allies expect the president to formally announce his reelection bid sometime after the State of the Union, but they note that could still be months away. Such a wait isn’t unusual for incumbents, who don’t need to introduce themselves to the electorate and generally want to be seen as focused on governing. But no president since Ronald Reagan has faced as much uncertainty about whether he would seek a second term. (Then the oldest president, Reagan was eight years younger in 1983 than the 80-year-old Biden is now.) Outgoing Chief of Staff Ron Klain pointedly referenced a reelection bid as he departed the White House last week, telling Biden he looked forward to supporting him “when you run for president in 2024.” But other White House officials routinely affix the qualifier “if he runs” to discussions about a potential campaign, suggesting it remains less than a sure thing.

    Aiding Biden is the fact that no Democrats of note (besides Marianne Williamson) have made any moves to challenge him for the nomination, and the president’s allies are operating under the assumption that he will have the field to himself. “I would be shocked at this point if this becomes a competitive primary,” Amanda Loveday, a senior adviser to the pro-Biden super PAC Unite the Country, told me.

    The bigger question is how many Republicans will challenge Biden knowing they’ll have to get through Trump first—and when they’ll see fit to jump in. GOP officials told me they expect Haley’s announcement to prompt others to enter the race soon. But Trump clearly froze the field for a while. All through 2021 and most of 2022, Buckley told me, “rarely a week went by without a major visit” to New Hampshire from a White House aspirant. “It all came to a grinding halt once Trump announced,” he said. Jeff Kaufmann, the Republican Party chair in Iowa, told me that the first months of 2021—the brief period after January 6 when Trump’s political future was in doubt—were busier for GOP hopefuls than this past January, just a year before the caucuses.

    For most of American history, the observation that barely anyone was campaigning more than a year and a half before the election would be entirely unremarkable. Only in this century has a two-year campaign for a four-year term in the White House become the norm. (As recently as 1992, the governor of a small southern state declared his candidacy only 14 months before the election, and he did just fine.)

    For most of the country, this respite from presidential politics is probably welcome, especially for voters who were inundated with nonstop campaign ads leading up to the midterm election. The view is a bit different, however, in Iowa and New Hampshire, where the quadrennial pilgrimage of politicos brings welcome attention and a sizable economic boost. Republicans in both states want to ensure that the GOP does not follow the Democrats in trying to leave them behind. Kaufmann told me he wasn’t worried; Senator Tim Scott would be coming out to Iowa in a few weeks, and others were calling to schedule events, perhaps preparing their launches. By March, he assured me, all would be back to normal. This extended presidential halftime will be over, and America’s never-ending campaign will resume in full.

    [ad_2]

    Russell Berman

    Source link