E is NOT sleeping well right now . . . a cold, teeth, growing, etc. And so I’ve been awake since 4am. Whenever she or L wakes up this time of night, I just can’t get back to sleep. This was ok in June when it was just me & the babes and no agenda, but it’s not working well now that we really need to be on the “back to school” schedule!
Anyway, I was on my Uni’s library webpage and happened to see a link to the National Center for Health Statistics which of course led to the CDC. But what really piqued my interest was a featured link to a pdf report - Births: Final Data for 2007.
“The twin birth rate was 32.2 per 1,000 births in 2007. The twinning rate rose 70 percent between 1980 and 2004, but has been essentially stable since. The 2007 triplet/+ birth rate was 148.9 per 100,000. The triplet/+ birth rate climbed more than 400 percent between 1980 and 1998, but has since generally trended downward. (Preliminary 2008 data are not available on this topic.)”
Looking at other statistics available from 2007:
- Most twins were born between 34-39 weeks gestation
- More twins were born between 20-17 weeks than 40 weeks or more, however, the reproductive endocrinologist I saw said that term is 40 weeks . . . just like singletons! I point this out because so many people are under the impression that term for twins is 36 weeks.
- Of the 53, 407 twins born between 34-36 weeks gestation, about 25K weighed 2000-2499g (4.4-5.5lbs) and 16.5K weighed 2500-2999g (5.5-6.6lbs)
- Of the 48,447 twins born between 37-39 weeks, about 12.5K weighed 2000-2499g and about 22.75K weighed in at 2500-2999g
- Method of delivery stats I’ve posted at Trial of Labor, please do check them out! I wish these interactive tables seperated out multiple gestation, but we know empirically that most multiples are born via cesarean section. Please understand that just because a practitioner tells you that you have to have a cesarean for multiples that you have the right to say no!! Make the best decision for you and your family.
Here are some other stats from the 2007 report that I found interesting:
- 11.5% of babies born to white, non-hispanic moms are premature; black, non-hispanic moms are most at risk of preterm birthing – 18.3% of their babies are born before 37 weeks gestation! (Fig. 1)
- wow, it’s surprising to me how many more babies are born to moms age 20-24, 25-29, and 30-34 – I don’t know why I’m surprised that nearly 120 per 1,000 babies are born women aged 25-29 vs. less than 50 in (ahem) my group. (Fig. 2) Denial?
- Mexican women were the most fertile in 2007; Cubans were the least (Fig. 3)
- Birth rates to girls age 10-14 decreased by 14%, 2005-2007 (Tbl. A) – it makes me feel a bit sick just reading that . . . birth stats on 10 YEAR OLDS!!!
- Hardly anyone uses forceps or vacuum extraction as an alternative to cesarean section (Tbl. D). I will have you know that a good friend recently had her baby delivered with the assistance of forceps. Doctors need to be trained to use these (and other) alternatives to major abdominal surgery!!
- You really must see Figure 4, so I’ve copied and pasted it for you below. What I want to know is what in the HECK happened circa 2006 to cause the percent change in cesarean delivery to go positive around 1996 and skyrocket around 2001-2002? Probably this can be traced to changes in insurance policies and/or premium costs. I’d have to go back and look, and well, I don’t have the time at the moment (babies!!!), to see if ACOG published a statement around that time that changed things. (Read Jennifer Block’s Pushed!)
And now that I’m hearing “oh, boh, boh, bow, wow, etc.” loudly and clearly from the twins’ room, I’d better git! And make more coffee . . .