Importance of the Sense of Pathology in Pregnancy and Delivery in View of a Realistic Curative and Preventive Attitude in Perinatalogy
The major problem in modern childbirth and perinatalogy is how to achieve the best security and how to induce realistic attitudes in the field of psycho-social development for parents, child and society. The question is whether the current trends in perinatal medicine are the only valid ones for the future. To answer, more accurate clinical research and reexamination of the mechanisms of healthy and unhealthy pregnancies and deliveries are necessary and possible. The following clinical data may be pointed out. The classical experience of psychoprophylaxis and the more recent results of the use of lumbo-sacral reflex therapy and of selective anxiolysis during labor show that most obstetric problems depend on the functional behaviour of the cervix. Normal labor and bearable pain result from a really inactive cervix; dysfunctional labor, protracted, with lumbar pain, more obstetric difficulties and risk of fetal distress is most often the consequence of a spasmodic activation of the upper partly muscular part of the cervix, in response to a primary central nervous hyperexcitation, where anxiety plays a dominant role. Taking these data into consideration we observe the same dilatation speed during the active phase in primiparas and multiparas, and the occurrence of secondary, delivery-room caesarian sections falls to 3.15%.
KeywordsFetal Distress Delivery Room Lumbar Pain Perinatal Medicine Preventive Attitude
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Irrmann M (1978) Risque et plaisir en obstetrique: la responsabilite actuelle de la medecine perina tale devant la naissance, les femmes et une politique de sante. Med Hyg 36: 342–351Google Scholar
- Irrmann M (1979) Enhancement of the role of cervical activation in the dysharmony of labor evolution by means of lumbar reflextherapy. In: Zichella L, Pancheri P (eds) Psychoneuroendocrinology in reproduction. Elsevier/North-Holland, Biomedical Press, Amsterdam, pp 589–598Google Scholar