Nexus - 0906 - New Times Magazine-pages

Page Content (OCR)

Ultrasound Scans: Not so Safe and Sound Continued from page 20 « Newnham J, Evans SF, Michael CA et al. Effects of 1999, 13(4)241-6. frequent ultrasound during pregnancy: a randomised * Sparling JW, Seeds JW, Farran DC. The relationship * Kieler H, Ahlsten G, Haguland B et al. Routine ultra- controlled trial. Lancet 1993, 342(8876):887-91. of obstetric ultrasound to parent and infant behavior. sound screening in pregnancy and the children's subse- * Newnham JP et al. Doppler flow velocity wave form — Obstet. Gynecol. 1988, 72(6):902-7. quent neurological development. Obstet. Gynecol. analysis in high risk pregnancies: a randomised con- . Senate Community Affairs Reference Committee. 1998, vol. 91, no. 5 (pt 1), pp. 750-6. trolled trial. Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 1991, vol. 98, no. Rocking the Cradle: A Report into Childbirth *Luck CA. Value of routine ultrasound scanning at 19 10, pp. 956-963. : : Procedures. Commonwealth of Australia, 1999. weeks: a four year study of 8849 deliveries. Br.Med. . Oakley Ann. The history of ultrasonography in * Stark CR, Orleans M, Havercamp AD etal. Short Journal 1992, vol. 34, no. 6840, pp. 1474-8. obstetrics. Birth 1986, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 8-13. 5 and long term risks after exposure to diagnostic ultra- * Liebeskind D, Bases R, Elequin F et al. Diagnostic . Odent M. Where does handedness come from? sound in ee Pbstet. Gynecol pe e. rie ultrasound: effects on the DNA and growth patterns of Primal Health Research Quarterly 1998, 6(1). * Taylor (A prudent approac to ultrasoun animal cells, Radiology 1979, 13(1):177-184. * Olsen O et al. Routine ultrasound dating has not been _imaging of the fetus and newborn. Birth 1990, vol. 17, vn, RD 8 Batam ‘ shown to be more accurate than the calendar method. no. 4, pp. 218-223. shorn RP, Comstock CH, Bottoms SF, Marx SR... @bsiet. Gynaecol. 1997, vol. 104, n0. 11, pp. + Testart J, Thebalt A, Souderis E, Frydman R. andomised prospective trial comparing ultrasonogra- . ee : ane . 1221-2. Premature ovulation after ovarian ultrasonography. Br. phy and pelvic examination for preterm labor surveil: | Rothman, Barbara Katz. The Tentative Pregnancy: J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 1982, 89(9):694-700. lance. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 1990, vol. 162, no. 6, en : a - or OP . A . 1603-1610. Amniocentesis and the Sexual Politics of Motherhood. * Thacker SB. Quality of controlled clinical trials. The PP. 1000- ‘ . . Pandora, 1994, 2nd edition. case of imaging ultrasound in obstetrics: a review. Br. * Marinac-Dabic D, Krulewitch CJ, Moore RM, i. « Saari-Kemppainen A, Karjalainen O, Ylostalo Pet al. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 1985, vol. 92, no. 5, pp. 437-444. The safety of Prenatal ultrasound exposure in human Ultrasound screening and perinatal mortality: con- + Wagner M. Ultrasound: More harm than good? studies. Epidemiology 2002 May 13 (3 Suppl):$19-22. _trolted trial of systematic one-stage screening in preg- Mothering magazine, Winter 1995. * Meire HB. The safety of diagnostic ultrasound (com- nancy. The Helsinki ultrasound trial. Lancet 1990, + Watkins D. An alternative to termination of mentary). Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 1987, vol. 94, pp. vol. 336, no. 8712, pp. 387-391. pregnancy. The Practitioner 1989, vol. 233, no. 1472, 1121-1122, : ; * Salvesen KA, Bakketeig LS, Eik-nes SH et al. pp. 990, 992. «MIDIRS. Informed Choice for Professionals, leaflet Routine ultrasonography in utero and school perfor- no. 3. Ultrasound screening in the first half of preg- mance at age 8-9 years. Lancet 1992, vol. 339, no. About the Author: nancy: is it useful for everyone? MIDIRS and the 8785, pp. 85-89. Sarah J. Buckley is a New Zealand-trained NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, 1996. * Salvesen KA, Vatten LJ, Eik-nes SH et al. Routine GP and an internationally published writer *Mole R. Possible hazards of imaging and Doppler ultrasonography in utero and subsequent handedness and advocate for gentle choices in pregnan- ultrasound in obstetrics. Birth 1986, 13:329-37. and neurological development. BMJ 1993, vol. 307, cy, birth and parenting. Sarah lives in + New Scientist. Shadow of doubt. 12 June 1999. no. 6897, pp. 159-64. Brisbane, Australia, with her husband + Neilson JP. Ultrasound for fetal assessment in early + Salvesen KA, Eik-nes SH et al. Ultrasound during Nicholas and is currently full-time mother to pregnancy (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane pregnancy and subsequent childhood non-right-hand- Emma (11), Zoe (9), Jacob (7) and Maia Rose Library, Oxford, Update Software, issue 2, 2002. edness — a meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. (2), all born at home. « Kieler H, Ahlsten G, Haguland B et al. Routine ultra- sound screening in pregnancy and the children's subse- quent neurological development. Obstet. Gynecol. 1998, vol. 91, no. 5 (pt 1), pp. 750-6. «Luck CA. Value of routine ultrasound scanning at 19 weeks: a four year study of 8849 deliveries. Br.Med. Journal 1992, vol. 34, no. 6840, pp. 1474-8. * Liebeskind D, Bases R, Elequin F et al. Diagnostic ultrasound: effects on the DNA and growth patterns of animal cells. Radiology 1979, 13(1):177-184. * Lorenz RP, Comstock CH, Bottoms SF, Marx SR. Randomised prospective trial comparing ultrasonogra- phy and pelvic examination for preterm labor surveil- lance. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 1990, vol. 162, no. 6, pp. 1603-1610. * Marinac-Dabic D, Krulewitch CJ, Moore RM, Jr. The safety of prenatal ultrasound exposure in human studies. Epidemiology 2002 May 13 (3 Suppl):S19-22. * Meire HB. The safety of diagnostic ultrasound (com- mentary). Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 1987, vol. 94, pp. 1121-1122. «MIDIRS. Informed Choice for Professionals, leaflet no. 3. Ultrasound screening in the first half of preg- nancy: is it useful for everyone? MIDIRS and the NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, 1996. * Mole R. Possible hazards of imaging and Doppler ultrasound in obstetrics. Birth 1986, 13:329-37. + New Scientist. Shadow of doubt. 12 June 1999. «Neilson JP. Ultrasound for fetal assessment in early pregnancy (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Oxford, Update Software, issue 2, 2002. About the Author: Sarah J. Buckley is a New Zealand-trained GP and an internationally published writer and advocate for gentle choices in pregnan- cy, birth and parenting. Sarah lives in Brisbane, Australia, with her husband Nicholas and is currently full-time mother to Emma (11), Zoe (9), Jacob (7) and Maia Rose (2), all born at home. 82 = NEXUS Continued from page 20 www.nexusmagazine.com OCTOBER — NOVEMBER 2002