To think Strep B tests should be offered to all pregnant women?

[plinkyplonks]

Hadn't even heard of Strep B if it hadn't been for Bumpfest.

My midwife says Strep B tests are not offered as standard on NHS!

Please, please, please consider signing this petition if you think this is a test that should be offered to all pregnant women:

epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/60515

This test is routine here in Australia at around 35 weeks. I am so shocked that it isn't the case in the U.K. What about Ireland?

Plinkyplonks - that i snot evidence though

i snot - ha ha ha!

To those who are worried about the lack of choice of options in labour with a positive result:

"We, the undersigned, ask the Department of Health to ensure that: EVERY woman is routinely given accurate information about group B Streptococcus (group B Strep or GBS) during antenatal care; every low-risk woman is offered a sensitive test for GBS, ideally at 35-37 weeks; and every higher-risk woman is offered antibiotics in labour. "

The petition is about empowering women by offering them education on Strep B, ensuring that the test is available should a woman want it, and she should be offered antibiotics in labour should she wish. It's not prescriptive - it's giving women options they currently don't have.

I've signed, was lucky enough that mine was picked up on when I had bleeding in early pregnancy.

Wrt risk vs benefit:

'A pregnant woman who tests positive for group B strep and gets antibiotics during labor has only a 1 in 4,000 chance of delivering a baby with group B strep disease, compared to a 1 in 200 chance if she does not get antibiotics during labor.'
From www.cdc.gov/groupbstrep/about/fast-facts.html

If AB resistance is of paramount concern, shouldn't we just stop prescribing ABs altogether? There is a difference between irresponsible doctors prescribing ABs for colds and doctors prescribing ABs that have a significant chance of preventing infections that can kill babies.

No it's not - because it's very hard to turn something like this down.

It's even harder to make the choice not to have the antiBs.

I wasn't toldni was being tested during induction, I wasn't given the option on antiBs either. It was made to seem like an emergency situation that I had it and I resented that when I discovered that 30% of women have it at any one time.

No, won't be signing. Without wishing in any way to underestimate the tragedy of losing a baby to GBS infection, the evidence for routine testing doesn't stack up and widespread prophylactic antibiotic use is a very bad idea indeed.

But we dont know the long term effects of prophylactic antibiotics at birth.

I'm not against them appropriately, but not if there aren't other risk factors involved. (I don't have the list but there is a very clear set of risk factors )

I think terror of 'medicalised birth' and the fixation on 'options' is getting out of hand in the UK.

It's as much a shibboleth as 'socialised medicine' is in the US.

Iirc, Ireland does not routinely test but there is a rising tide of opinion in favour of it.

(And pneumonia is another risk babies are exposed to due to maternal GBS).

I think fear of medicalised birth is reasonable - we know it increases the risk of caesarian, which in turns increases the risk of morbidity and mortality, both neonatal and maternal. It is ok to be concerned about that.

Do you think, because of that fear, women should be denied the opportunity to choose for themselves whether they have the Strep B test, denied the opportunity to have a medicalised birth if it potentially saves their and their babies lives? Do you think women should at least have access to all the information via their midwife so they can at least make informed choices?

Right now, thousands of pregnant women are in the dark about Strep B :/

Prophylactic ABs have been administered at birth for quite a long time - for instance to babies at risk of syphilis. Risks are well known.

We know the risks of not administering ABs in the case of identified GBS -- 1/200 babies.

We call something medicalised birth when what we are talking about is an IV in the arm that delivers ABs to kill bacteria that could kill the baby?

We refuse to countenance that on grounds that there is something to be gained from delivering a baby vaginally only to see it fall to meningitis?

'30% of women have it at any one time.'

Indeed, and it is relatively benign most of the time. The problem with GBS only rears its ugly head when a baby goes through the birth canal, and that problem is as bad a problem as problems can be.

As a mother of a baby who had gbs I am passionate about this being tested. My Dd (4) was incredibly lucky and made a full recovery from her septacaemia. I'd never heard of it until the doctors were talking about spinal taps Tec and my poor baby was very poorly. It scares me how people can be blase about it when its so serious.

Signed!!!

I live in Canada, where all women are tested for Strep B at 36 weeks. Here, a self-swab is taken (not easy, when you have a big belly ), and you get the results a few days later. I was negative both times with my DCs, but I guess it's good for you and the hospital to have the full picture.

DS1 affected by this at birth. The singlemost dreadful time of my life was seeing him born blue and fighting for life for days. By day 2, they were able to identify GBS sepsis and pneumonia and we were told he may not make it through that night.

It was the first time I'd heard of GBS.

I would do anything to be able to turn back time and have antiobiotics during labour rather than have him injected every four hours for days. The antibiotic injections sting and are painful, I know because I was having them too. The doses given were meningitis doses with risk of hearing loss. The risks of side effects from the antibiotics much higher by that stage than if i'd had them much earlier.

So forgive me if I get a bit shitty with people that start playing it down or telling people to stick garlic up their foof and it will all be fine.

He's 10 and fine now thankfully but it was the start of a long first year of respiratory illness, feeding problems, growth problems and PND.

As I said before, the Royal college of obs and gyne disagree with routine testing. They are the experts.

Carol have you seen your child suffer with gbs??

I don't think it's the job of the NHS to educate pregnant women about something like this. We all have access to google and there is plenty of information out there and it is a parents job to find out what they need to know about having babies.

I'm also not sure that it should be an untrained woman's choice whether to take antibiotics and give them to her newborn or not. Deciding on medication is a highly trained professionals job.

If we can't trust parents to do a bit of research when they're expecting a baby, I'm don't think we should be trusting them to make medical decisions.

Of course if you've had a child who has been affected by GBS then your feelings about routine testing will be clearly, and understandably, different from that of the RCOG or whoever. And it is really important that in this discussion the experiences of families who have been affected by GBS aren't sidelined or diminished - I too would give short shrift to anyone who suggested a garlic clove in the vagina!

But...routine testing is a big deal. it does have implications beyond some arbitrary 'fear of medicalisation' - the are good reasons to avoid any intervention that isn't absolutely necessary and they have nothing to do with airy-fairy fantasies about natural birth. Plus, this is the NHS we're talking about and the financial issues around introducing a routine test-and-treat programme are huge. It's always horrible to bring money into discussions about saving babies but these are the things that the RCOG/NICE have to consider.

It's a difficult one - I have looked after GBS-infected babies and I think the 'even if it saves one baby' argument is understandable on an emotional level at least.

PtolemysNeedle - Do you hold that opinion about the flu vaccine, whooping cough vaccine, GTT screening, Downs syndrome tests etc? All of which the NHS offers tests and provides information for? How about cot death, mental health in pregnancy .. the list goes on? If there is an argument for education in these medical tests and information programmes, why should strep b be any different?

I am in Ireland and was urine tested at twelve weeks, if you are positive they bring you back for a swab at 37 weeks.
Antibiotics in labour are given to mother and newborns are monitored for three days now. They used to routinely give anti bs to newborns if mother didn't get the dose on time but have recently changed to monitoring babies and anti bs only if necessary.
I have had gbs on both, I don't understand how something that can be picked up in a simple urine test isn't offered

Signed it. I'm 38 weeks pregnant and have it. Admittedly the baby has more to worry about as everyone knows cos I keep ranting but the antibiotics will be going into me, not her. I won't be having a rapid labour anyway as I'm getting induced next week for other complications but totally agree gbs is underestimated. Mine was picked up by chance due to recurrent thrush and uti's since about 14 weeks and has come back on every swab test since.

On this occasion it was a preventable stillbirth, possibly, suppose no one really knows but if the only factor was undiagnosed gbs then that should be enough reason to screen for it. Besides the suggestion is to screen between 35-37 weeks so chances of it going again before labour are lessened. Poor family.