Is Delayed cord clamping evidence based practice?

Answered by Phillip Nicastro

Delayed cord clamping refers to the practice of waiting a certain amount of time before cutting the umbilical cord after the birth of a baby. The question of whether delayed cord clamping is an evidence-based practice is an important one, as it can have implications for both preterm and term infants.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) released a statement in 2012 regarding delayed cord clamping. According to their guidelines, there is evidence to support waiting 30 to 60 seconds before clamping the cord in preterm infants. This delay allows for an increased transfer of blood from the placenta to the baby, which has been shown to have benefits for preterm infants, including improved blood volume, decreased need for blood transfusions, and decreased risk of necrotizing enterocolitis.

However, when it comes to term infants, the evidence is insufficient to support delayed cord clamping. ACOG states that there is no clear benefit or harm associated with delayed cord clamping in term infants. This means that the decision regarding whether to delay cord clamping in term infants should be based on individual circumstances and healthcare provider judgment.

It is important to note that the duration of delayed cord clamping can vary. Some studies have suggested waiting for 30 seconds, while others have recommended waiting up to five minutes. This range can lead to confusion about what is meant by “delayed” clamping of the cord.

To determine the evidence-based practice for delayed cord clamping, it is necessary to look at the current research and guidelines. A Cochrane review published in 2013 analyzed the available evidence and concluded that delayed cord clamping (defined as clamping the cord at least 30 seconds after birth) resulted in several benefits for both preterm and term infants. These benefits included higher hemoglobin levels, increased iron stores, and a decreased risk of iron deficiency anemia in infancy. The review also found no significant increase in adverse effects associated with delayed cord clamping.

Personal experiences and situations can also provide insights into the practice of delayed cord clamping. Many healthcare providers and parents have reported positive outcomes and experiences with delayed cord clamping. They have observed improved health and well-being in infants, including better transition to life outside the womb and reduced risk of certain complications.

While the evidence supports delayed cord clamping in preterm infants, the evidence is insufficient to make a clear recommendation for delayed cord clamping in term infants. Healthcare providers should consider individual circumstances and use their clinical judgment when making decisions about delayed cord clamping. Personal experiences and observations also play a role in understanding the potential benefits and risks of this practice.