If EPV is so simple, inexpensive and beneficial, why aren’t more providers doing this?
Good question! Here are some of the responses we’ve heard:
”But I can’t intervene and deliver every baby who has a placenta that’s less than 10th percentile.”
A: We agree! EPV is just one tool in the toolbox, not a final determination of when a baby should be born. It is helpful to flag fetuses at higher risk who could benefit from increased monitoring. Important subsequent questions a provider should ask include:
How much smaller than 10th percentile is this placenta? Smaller placentas come with higher risks of stillbirth.
How large is the fetus, and what is the F:P (Fetal:Placental) ratio? A 10:1 F:P ratio at any point in pregnancy may be a cause for concern. What is the gestational age? If full term, the risks of delivery of the fetus might be small, particularly compared to waiting. Has the mother noticed any decreased fetal movement? Are there any other signs of fetal compromise? Is there reduced cord blood flow? Is there evidence of placenta deterioration? EPV alone is not meant to determine the optial delivery time of a fetus, but can potentially help in deciding the optimal time for a fetus to be delivered.
”Show me the controlled, randomized study demonstrating the benefits of EPV, then I’ll act.”
A: We encourage providers to read the peer-reviewed research that has already been published regarding EPV. These published studies, found in our research archive, show that: 1) EPV can detect small placentas, and 2) small placentas increase the risk of stillbirth. While we would like to see a large-scale, controlled, randomized study to see if EPV implementation can also reduce stillbirths (a step beyond detecting small placentas), we have not yet identified a funding source. One hurdle to funding such a study is that controlled, randomized studies in prenatal care and stillbirth are limited by ethical and cost factors. Studies on pregnant women are restricted because they are a vulnerable population. It is unethical to put women in a control group and allow small placentas to fail. Stillbirth, though far too common at 6/1,000 pregnancies in the US, is uncommon enough that any controlled, randomized study would need to be very large in order to be able to detect any significant difference between groups. Additionally, funding for studies on simple technologies like EPV have been difficult to identify. Funding committees tend to prefer “wow” factor ideas, like genetic analysis, in utero surgeries, or studies using MRI to measure the placenta, even though widespread implementation of these ideas may be difficult or expensive. Moreover, no private company stands to benefit financially from this study. The families who would otherwise have stillborn babies, and their doctors, are the ones who benefit from EPV implementation. In spite of these hurdles, we are open to suggestions on where and how to get this large EPV study funded. If you are a researcher or provider with an idea to fund a large EPV study, please email measuretheplacenta@gmail.com.
”I’ll wait until other doctors are doing it, then I’ll do it.”
A: This response is potentially due to our legal system and providers wanting safety in numbers. If doctors provide the same care as other providers in their area, no matter how insufficient or incomplete this care may be, they theoretically decrease their risk of losing a lawsuit in the case of a stillbirth by saying “I do what any other provider would have done.” If doctors do anything different from the providers around them, potential future plaintiffs could theoretically argue they provided a different standard of care than the norm, and this could put them at greater legal risk.
However, progress in prenatal care depends on doctors thinking critically, gathering appropriate data on which to make decisions, and doing the right thing for their patients, regardless of legal systems and backwards incentives.
”I want to see more research first, even if it’s not a fully controlled randomized study.”
A: We direct those inquiries to our research archive. Many doctors will review the existing body of research about small placentas and EPV and conclude they should incorporate this into their practice.
To further support these extensive findings, we hope to see even more large-scale and ethically conducted research in the future. However, asking for more research is always an option in the field of medicine. What qualifies as “enough” research to implement a new practice? Many will look at the current evidence base for EPV and small placentas and decide that the risk of not incorporating EPV into prenatal care exceeds the risk of continuing with the status quo of ignoring placenta sizes as a risk factor for stillbirth.
”When ACOG supports EPV, then I will implement it.”
A: We have written to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists many times to ask for their thoughts about EPV implementation. They have never responded. We encourage these prenatal care providers to ask ACOG for a literature review on the link between small placentas and stillbirth and statement on EPV.