labguru Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 Can someone help me out with the term "child bearing potential"? I am revising a "Emergency Release of Blood Product" procedure and it states that a Female of child bearing age should get O negative blood. Of course this is a patient with unknown ABORH and in an immediate need of transfusion. My thought is any female under 50 years old should fall under this category. Do you have a policy that states a specific age "range" for these females? Is there going to be a difference in a 6 year old and a 12 year old in terms of creating an anti-D? I guess I'm getting hung up on the term "child bearing potential" and I don't want to think of a child as having child bearing potential- but I guess they have the potential until they hit menopause. Or do I have this wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcolm Needs ☆ Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 You have it exactly correct as far as "child-bearing potential" is concerned labguru. It used to be that it was written as a "female of child-bearing age", but there were occasions when D Positive blood was given to a D Negative female child, because they were not of child-bearing age, with the result that they were sensitised to the D antigen, causing all sorts of problems when they did become pregnant (the crass idiots that transfused this blood gave the "excuse" that the female child was not of "child-bearing age"). As a result, the phrase was changed to "child-bearing potential" to include all females from 0 to 50 years of age (at least, it is 50 years of age in the UK, and this upper age limit is evidence-based, although, of course, you will always get the exceptions). 50 may not be the age at which all females have reached the menopause, but UK statistics show that the likelihood of a D Negative female without anti-D, is given D Positive blood, and then makes anti-D, and then goes on to become pregnant with a D Positive foetus is disappearingly small. John C. Staley, labguru and Cliff 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 ^ what he said. We see a lot of high risk cases, we increased our age from 50 to 55. labguru 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
galvania Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 It's 60 here now , I think. I can't think of anythong worse than having babies at my age though. You're welcome to give me D+ any time you like! (Mind you, I AM D+, so it doesn't really count) Malcolm Needs, David Saikin, AuntiS and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Pepper Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 2 hours ago, galvania said: I can't think of anythong worse than having babies at my age though. I can, Anna, that would be me having one at my age. I think I would get negative feedback from my wife...... AuntiS, AMcCord and Malcolm Needs 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMcCord Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Our protocol says that males under 18 and females under 50 will receive Rh neg blood whenever possible. If we were running out of Rh negative blood, I sure that we would consider switching the young males to Rh pos to save the Rh neg for the younger female patients. We discussed 55 vs 50 for females but the board certified trauma physician who is head of our emergency services department said that age 50 was what was recommended in trauma related literature. When and if age 55 predominates in the literature, I'm sure that he would reconsider. (Lab had been using < 19 years for males and 55 or < years for females.) Malcolm Needs and labguru 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tricore Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Here are some exeptions. http://www.aarp.org/home-family/friends-family/info-2014/pregnancy-fertility-over-50.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcolm Needs ☆ Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 As I said, you will always find exceptions. Maria del Carmen Bousada de Lara was 66 years and 358 days when she gave birth to twins, following IVF treatment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Pepper Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Malcolm, that is indeed remarkable, if not more than a little masochistic. A few years ago I read about a case where a woman went in for a routine C section and to their great surprise, the baby was not in the uterus. It apparently had been an ectopic pregnancy and the placenta attached to the small intestine. The baby spent nine happy months in the peritoneum with no complications. It was observed that, since a womb was apparently not a necessity, with the proper hormones a man could indeed carry a baby himself (although a natural delivery might prove difficult). That being said, I'm still with Anna on this one. Malcolm Needs, AMcCord, galvania and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
galvania Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 As for the 66 year old lady - well that opens a whole new can of worms doesn't it. Masochistic lady (and sadistic towards the child!) and sadistic doctor, i reckon. In my opinion, she needs psychotherapy, not IVF - and the doctor who did it should be struck off! Dr. Pepper, AMcCord, Sandy L and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DPruden Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 We increased ours from 50 to 55 for the upper age. Look at Table 2 in this division of vital statistics report, only 677 women between the ages of 50-54 had a live birth in the US in 2013. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_01.pdf AMcCord 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now