Re: After two consults at CT, confused...

[Guest guest]

Hi there!

I would certainly recommend a second opinion if you're not

comfortable with the dx that you received at CTI. I do think you

already know what you want to do as far as treatment, so is a second

opinion really neccessary? You really can only go with your mommy

guy. Do you have any pictures you could post so that we could " see "

what you're describing? I'm sorry I couldn't be of more help.

Dustie

--- In Plagiocephaly , " cooper_ts " <tscmsu@h...>

wrote:

> I am hoping that someone here has insight to offer- sorry the

> background will be kinda long.

>

> At my daughter's 2 month ped. appt., he recommended repositioning.

I

> wish he had fully explained HOW to do it and how aggressive to be

or

> that I had put more effort into researching this at that point.

> Anyway, at her 4 month appt., her head was still flat across the

> lower part of her head with the right side being slightly more

flat

> (she does not have torticollis, though), so he gave us a

prescription

> for CT. We went at 4 1/2 months for a free consult. They took

> pictures and measurements.

>

> At that point, the top of her head was completely round. She just

had

> flattening in the lower back (increased on right), some small

bulging

> over her ears and some increased height to the top of the back of

her

> head. She had no facial asymmetry. By all accounts and these

> measurements, I considered her to have a mild case of plagio. The

CT

> therapist said mild to moderate, and said that it would be up to

us

> about the band. I'm not even really sure that it is considered

> plagio, since the top of her head was completely round- in all of

the

> online research I have done and pics I have seen, the babies with

> plagio/brachio, etc. all have odd shapes when looking at the top

of

> their heads. Can someone address this for me?

>

> We got more aggressive about repositioning, and asked them to at

> daycare, but definitely would fall short of the efforts I've seen

> many of you discuss. Nevertheless, my husband and I and other

family

> members were sure that her head was beginning to round out some at

> the bottom. We went back to CT for a 5 1/2 mo. free consult. My

> husband and I honestly expected them to say it was better. The

> therapist immediately said- the bulges over her ears are bigger.

> Let's take measurements. The measurements she took indicated a

slight

> amount of facial asymmetry (like 3mm), the same ratio of depth

> measurements and increased width measurements. Again, they took

> pictures and placed them side by side for us to look at. The

rounding

> at the bottom of her head is undeniably better. The top of her

head

> is still round, with maybe the forehead becoming ever so slightly

> flat. But the therapist said that overall she is worse, because of

> the increasing width vs. depth of her head. She said that the

height

> in the back was worse and that the angle of her head height/

forehead

> is worse (still moderate, however) and that she would recommend

the

> band. We were shocked! I can see what she is saying from the

> pictures, but is it not possible that her head will grow more

depth

> in future months- can it grow wide one month and deep the next?

Are

> we not on to a different issue (head width) than what we were sent

> there for in the first place (flat head)? I'm so confused.

>

> I don't know whether to seek a second opinion (maybe a specialist

> DOCTOR- the people at CT are 'therapists') or to think it is a

crock

> and continue repositioning and not worry about it. (Sidebar: My

older

> daughter has a small hemangioma under her eye. We decided not to

seek

> treatment for it and it has almost completely involuted by almost

age

> 3. Based on this, my gut is to leave this alone as well.)

>

> I read some comments at ivillage that were very interesting,

> especially someone wrote about the need for a new norm for the

> cephalic ratio (increased width vs. depth of head) due to the back

to

> sleep campaign. Any more insight would be greatly appreciated.

[Guest guest]

Hi there and welcome.

You should do whatever you feel comfortable doing. It is a catch 22

sometimes when seeking more information. I'd love to look at your

childs pics too and am definitely more for repo than banding if it is

mild. I would never push it just bcz my ds has it. The head will

get wider if they spend more time flat on their back. I'm not sure

how height is affected. Look at my son's pics and tell me if your

child's is remotely close to his. Or does anyone else's child's head

resemble your child's? I don't know if I helped you at all...

Sue

Colin F. 10 mos. brachy

Buffalo, NY

[Guest guest]

Hi Sue and thanks for your comments.

How do I find your son's pictures? I would like to compare. I see

some other pictures under photos and will see if any of them look

similar to hers.

I will try to scan and post the pics they took at CT or take some

more to post so that you can see what I'm talking about.

I am not opposed to the band (I will seek braces for her if she has

crooked teeth), but it is a difficult decision because she is still

growing and changing and we don't know what it might do on its own.

I guess right now I feel like it is mild and she could live with it

fine, but I am worried that it seems to be getting worse and you hate

to wait and have double the treatment time...

Terri

> Hi there and welcome.

>

> You should do whatever you feel comfortable doing. It is a catch

22

> sometimes when seeking more information. I'd love to look at your

> childs pics too and am definitely more for repo than banding if it

is

> mild. I would never push it just bcz my ds has it. The head will

> get wider if they spend more time flat on their back. I'm not sure

> how height is affected. Look at my son's pics and tell me if your

> child's is remotely close to his. Or does anyone else's child's

head

> resemble your child's? I don't know if I helped you at all...

>

> Sue

> Colin F. 10 mos. brachy

> Buffalo, NY

[Guest guest]

Hi there

I don't have any more information about head measurements etc,

perhaps one of the moderators might help with that. All I can do is

offer my own opinion, which is that it seems to me that the issue

isn't whether CT think your daughter's head shape is 'normal'

(according to their own definition, or standard definitions which

could change over time), but rather whether you are relatively happy

with it and consider it mild and improving. I think it would be

very hard to go ahead with banding your baby if in your heart of

hearts you don't really belive it to be necessary.

I don't think there is a definitive answer to whether you

daughter's head will round out further- I have a friend whose baby

had a very flat, wide head (brachy) but didn't know it could be

treated, and it rounded out really nicely with no intervention. On

the other hand, there are plenty of parents on this website who have

children into their second year who are showing no signs of rounding

whatsoever and are seeking treatment. My own daughter just seemed to

get worse and worse between 4-7 months- but who knows what the

future would have held. I think it was one of the moderators who

said a very sensible thing: you have to ask yourself, 'if my

daughter's headshape didn't change one bit in the future, would I be

happy with it as it is now?' If you are basically happy, then you

have your answer. If you would only be happy if it did in fact round

out more or achieve more depth, then perhaps you do need to consider

how this might be done if nature doesn't have that in store for her

or repositioning doesn't seem to be solving the problem.

As for charts showing what is 'normal' (i.e. normally distributed),

I share your view that these are culturally determined by what we

are prepared to accept as normal, and may need revising as those

norms change for whatever reason. On the other hand, they can flag

up major problems (it is unlikely that a new chart would bear no

relation to the old one). The issue is: do you personally think

there is an issue drastic enough to be solved by putting your

daughter in a band. I did, so I did. I guess that's the question you

are currently considering.

Good luck with your dilemma, you sound a very caring mum.

Hannah (Lucia's mum, UK)

--- In Plagiocephaly , " cooper_ts " <tscmsu@h...>

wrote:

> I am hoping that someone here has insight to offer- sorry the

> background will be kinda long.

>

> At my daughter's 2 month ped. appt., he recommended repositioning.

I

> wish he had fully explained HOW to do it and how aggressive to be

or

> that I had put more effort into researching this at that point.

> Anyway, at her 4 month appt., her head was still flat across the

> lower part of her head with the right side being slightly more

flat

> (she does not have torticollis, though), so he gave us a

prescription

> for CT. We went at 4 1/2 months for a free consult. They took

> pictures and measurements.

>

> At that point, the top of her head was completely round. She just

had

> flattening in the lower back (increased on right), some small

bulging

> over her ears and some increased height to the top of the back of

her

> head. She had no facial asymmetry. By all accounts and these

> measurements, I considered her to have a mild case of plagio. The

CT

> therapist said mild to moderate, and said that it would be up to

us

> about the band. I'm not even really sure that it is considered

> plagio, since the top of her head was completely round- in all of

the

> online research I have done and pics I have seen, the babies with

> plagio/brachio, etc. all have odd shapes when looking at the top

of

> their heads. Can someone address this for me?

>

> We got more aggressive about repositioning, and asked them to at

> daycare, but definitely would fall short of the efforts I've seen

> many of you discuss. Nevertheless, my husband and I and other

family

> members were sure that her head was beginning to round out some at

> the bottom. We went back to CT for a 5 1/2 mo. free consult. My

> husband and I honestly expected them to say it was better. The

> therapist immediately said- the bulges over her ears are bigger.

> Let's take measurements. The measurements she took indicated a

slight

> amount of facial asymmetry (like 3mm), the same ratio of depth

> measurements and increased width measurements. Again, they took

> pictures and placed them side by side for us to look at. The

rounding

> at the bottom of her head is undeniably better. The top of her

head

> is still round, with maybe the forehead becoming ever so slightly

> flat. But the therapist said that overall she is worse, because of

> the increasing width vs. depth of her head. She said that the

height

> in the back was worse and that the angle of her head height/

forehead

> is worse (still moderate, however) and that she would recommend

the

> band. We were shocked! I can see what she is saying from the

> pictures, but is it not possible that her head will grow more

depth

> in future months- can it grow wide one month and deep the next?

Are

> we not on to a different issue (head width) than what we were sent

> there for in the first place (flat head)? I'm so confused.

>

> I don't know whether to seek a second opinion (maybe a specialist

> DOCTOR- the people at CT are 'therapists') or to think it is a

crock

> and continue repositioning and not worry about it. (Sidebar: My

older

> daughter has a small hemangioma under her eye. We decided not to

seek

> treatment for it and it has almost completely involuted by almost

age

> 3. Based on this, my gut is to leave this alone as well.)

>

> I read some comments at ivillage that were very interesting,

> especially someone wrote about the need for a new norm for the

> cephalic ratio (increased width vs. depth of head) due to the back

to

> sleep campaign. Any more insight would be greatly appreciated.

[Guest guest]

Hannah,

Thanks very much for your comments. I really appreciate them. I

think you hit the nail on the head about the question I'm considering.

I am not against the band. Actually, I think it is wonderful to have

a treatment option available. And, after all, I will seek braces for

her if she has crooked teeth. I view this as no different, except

that the decision is not as clear cut because she is still growing

and changing so much and you need to make a decision while they are

growing and changing so as not to prolong the treatment time.

How old was Lucie when she was banded? And how long will she have to

be treated? You say she got worse from 4 to 7 months- this, I fear,

is what we are seeing as well. Just this morning, I was looking at

Rylee and it seemed that her head is becoming flat on the back

looking from the top.

To answer the question, when we left CT at the 4 1/2 month appt. we

discussed that we would not band her unless it got worse. Of course,

at the 5 1/2 month appt.- those were the exact words used- it is

worse. And, I guess even now, I believe if it did not get worse from

today, I feel that she could live with the headshape she has.

However, I have this dread that it keeps getting worse and I keep

reading that waiting is bad...

Thanks so much again-

Terri

> > I am hoping that someone here has insight to offer- sorry the

> > background will be kinda long.

> >

> > At my daughter's 2 month ped. appt., he recommended

repositioning.

> I

> > wish he had fully explained HOW to do it and how aggressive to be

> or

> > that I had put more effort into researching this at that point.

> > Anyway, at her 4 month appt., her head was still flat across the

> > lower part of her head with the right side being slightly more

> flat

> > (she does not have torticollis, though), so he gave us a

> prescription

> > for CT. We went at 4 1/2 months for a free consult. They took

> > pictures and measurements.

> >

> > At that point, the top of her head was completely round. She just

> had

> > flattening in the lower back (increased on right), some small

> bulging

> > over her ears and some increased height to the top of the back of

> her

> > head. She had no facial asymmetry. By all accounts and these

> > measurements, I considered her to have a mild case of plagio. The

> CT

> > therapist said mild to moderate, and said that it would be up to

> us

> > about the band. I'm not even really sure that it is considered

> > plagio, since the top of her head was completely round- in all of

> the

> > online research I have done and pics I have seen, the babies with

> > plagio/brachio, etc. all have odd shapes when looking at the top

> of

> > their heads. Can someone address this for me?

> >

> > We got more aggressive about repositioning, and asked them to at

> > daycare, but definitely would fall short of the efforts I've seen

> > many of you discuss. Nevertheless, my husband and I and other

> family

> > members were sure that her head was beginning to round out some

at

> > the bottom. We went back to CT for a 5 1/2 mo. free consult. My

> > husband and I honestly expected them to say it was better. The

> > therapist immediately said- the bulges over her ears are bigger.

> > Let's take measurements. The measurements she took indicated a

> slight

> > amount of facial asymmetry (like 3mm), the same ratio of depth

> > measurements and increased width measurements. Again, they took

> > pictures and placed them side by side for us to look at. The

> rounding

> > at the bottom of her head is undeniably better. The top of her

> head

> > is still round, with maybe the forehead becoming ever so slightly

> > flat. But the therapist said that overall she is worse, because

of

> > the increasing width vs. depth of her head. She said that the

> height

> > in the back was worse and that the angle of her head height/

> forehead

> > is worse (still moderate, however) and that she would recommend

> the

> > band. We were shocked! I can see what she is saying from the

> > pictures, but is it not possible that her head will grow more

> depth

> > in future months- can it grow wide one month and deep the next?

> Are

> > we not on to a different issue (head width) than what we were

sent

> > there for in the first place (flat head)? I'm so confused.

> >

> > I don't know whether to seek a second opinion (maybe a specialist

> > DOCTOR- the people at CT are 'therapists') or to think it is a

> crock

> > and continue repositioning and not worry about it. (Sidebar: My

> older

> > daughter has a small hemangioma under her eye. We decided not to

> seek

> > treatment for it and it has almost completely involuted by almost

> age

> > 3. Based on this, my gut is to leave this alone as well.)

> >

> > I read some comments at ivillage that were very interesting,

> > especially someone wrote about the need for a new norm for the

> > cephalic ratio (increased width vs. depth of head) due to the

back

> to

> > sleep campaign. Any more insight would be greatly appreciated.

[Guest guest]

Hi there Terri

Lucia was 7 months when she got her helmet- we are in the UK and it

is a passive band, so really relies on natural growth only, so it

was important to get her in it asap. I understand that lots of

people in the US have active bands which can be started later, so

although it is better to start earlier in terms of length of

treatment, I don't think you need to panic. Our own specialist even

suggested to us we wait another month if unsure (which would have

been 8 months), because although he totally recommended early

treatment, he also felt it was very important to be committed to

what you are doing, and that if we wanted to leave it another month

and see if there was any change, we should feel free to do so rather

than rush in when uncertain. In fact, we decided to go ahead there

and then as I found the waiting was simply prolonging the agony!

Lucia was measured as severe on their charts- I thought it was

moderate at the least in my own judgement. Having said that, I

didn't feel that it looked severe- so it still left me in a quandry.

On the one hand I didn't feel like looking the way she did would

probably alter her life drastically at all ( what you are saying) ,

but on the other I had this nagging feeling that it wasn't quite

right for a baby to start out life with a wonky head. I still feel

the same- I don't think it would have been the end of the world for

her to have been left, but I was glad to have the option to change

it.

I'm probably not helping at all, but hopefully by thinking about

what people say and seeing how you react to it might help you find

out how you feel about it yourself. I had reservations all the time

about starting helmet therapy- on the day and for days afterwards.

My husband even said to me, why don't we get the helmet and if we

feel like we are doing the wrong thing, we'll just throw it away (by

the way, we've got no money, so this wasn't a trivial thing to say!)

he was just trying to let me know that you don't have to go ahead

with things unless they feel right, even if you are quite far ahead

with the process. I think perhaps something in you would like to

continue a bit further with this- it might be worth seeking a second

opinion, or setting a deadline for repo, and at some point you will

either just take the plunge and get her a band, or something in you

will stop you- your guts will kick in if they have to!

Let us know how you are getting along- it is a hard time, but I feel

sure you will find your way through this.

Hannah

> > > I am hoping that someone here has insight to offer- sorry the

> > > background will be kinda long.

> > >

> > > At my daughter's 2 month ped. appt., he recommended

> repositioning.

> > I

> > > wish he had fully explained HOW to do it and how aggressive to

be

> > or

> > > that I had put more effort into researching this at that

point.

> > > Anyway, at her 4 month appt., her head was still flat across

the

> > > lower part of her head with the right side being slightly more

> > flat

> > > (she does not have torticollis, though), so he gave us a

> > prescription

> > > for CT. We went at 4 1/2 months for a free consult. They took

> > > pictures and measurements.

> > >

> > > At that point, the top of her head was completely round. She

just

> > had

> > > flattening in the lower back (increased on right), some small

> > bulging

> > > over her ears and some increased height to the top of the back

of

> > her

> > > head. She had no facial asymmetry. By all accounts and these

> > > measurements, I considered her to have a mild case of plagio.

The

> > CT

> > > therapist said mild to moderate, and said that it would be up

to

> > us

> > > about the band. I'm not even really sure that it is considered

> > > plagio, since the top of her head was completely round- in all

of

> > the

> > > online research I have done and pics I have seen, the babies

with

> > > plagio/brachio, etc. all have odd shapes when looking at the

top

> > of

> > > their heads. Can someone address this for me?

> > >

> > > We got more aggressive about repositioning, and asked them to

at

> > > daycare, but definitely would fall short of the efforts I've

seen

> > > many of you discuss. Nevertheless, my husband and I and other

> > family

> > > members were sure that her head was beginning to round out

some

> at

> > > the bottom. We went back to CT for a 5 1/2 mo. free consult.

My

> > > husband and I honestly expected them to say it was better. The

> > > therapist immediately said- the bulges over her ears are

bigger.

> > > Let's take measurements. The measurements she took indicated a

> > slight

> > > amount of facial asymmetry (like 3mm), the same ratio of depth

> > > measurements and increased width measurements. Again, they

took

> > > pictures and placed them side by side for us to look at. The

> > rounding

> > > at the bottom of her head is undeniably better. The top of her

> > head

> > > is still round, with maybe the forehead becoming ever so

slightly

> > > flat. But the therapist said that overall she is worse,

because

> of

> > > the increasing width vs. depth of her head. She said that the

> > height

> > > in the back was worse and that the angle of her head height/

> > forehead

> > > is worse (still moderate, however) and that she would

recommend

> > the

> > > band. We were shocked! I can see what she is saying from the

> > > pictures, but is it not possible that her head will grow more

> > depth

> > > in future months- can it grow wide one month and deep the

next?

> > Are

> > > we not on to a different issue (head width) than what we were

> sent

> > > there for in the first place (flat head)? I'm so confused.

> > >

> > > I don't know whether to seek a second opinion (maybe a

specialist

> > > DOCTOR- the people at CT are 'therapists') or to think it is a

> > crock

> > > and continue repositioning and not worry about it. (Sidebar:

My

> > older

> > > daughter has a small hemangioma under her eye. We decided not

to

> > seek

> > > treatment for it and it has almost completely involuted by

almost

> > age

> > > 3. Based on this, my gut is to leave this alone as well.)

> > >

> > > I read some comments at ivillage that were very interesting,

> > > especially someone wrote about the need for a new norm for the

> > > cephalic ratio (increased width vs. depth of head) due to the

> back

> > to

> > > sleep campaign. Any more insight would be greatly appreciated.

[Guest guest]

My son Miles also has a hemangioma on his upper eyelid that he has

had steroid treatments for. We got to see the famous Dr. Waner of

CBS This Morning fame for advice when he was about 2 mo. old. It's

funny, you never heard about these things before you had kids and

then you find lots of people who've gone through the same thing.

Anyone out there with a hypospadius? He's got that too

--- In Plagiocephaly , " cooper_ts " <tscmsu@h...>

wrote:

> I am hoping that someone here has insight to offer- sorry the

> background will be kinda long.

>

> At my daughter's 2 month ped. appt., he recommended repositioning.

I

> wish he had fully explained HOW to do it and how aggressive to be

or

> that I had put more effort into researching this at that point.

> Anyway, at her 4 month appt., her head was still flat across the

> lower part of her head with the right side being slightly more

flat

> (she does not have torticollis, though), so he gave us a

prescription

> for CT. We went at 4 1/2 months for a free consult. They took

> pictures and measurements.

>

> At that point, the top of her head was completely round. She just

had

> flattening in the lower back (increased on right), some small

bulging

> over her ears and some increased height to the top of the back of

her

> head. She had no facial asymmetry. By all accounts and these

> measurements, I considered her to have a mild case of plagio. The

CT

> therapist said mild to moderate, and said that it would be up to

us

> about the band. I'm not even really sure that it is considered

> plagio, since the top of her head was completely round- in all of

the

> online research I have done and pics I have seen, the babies with

> plagio/brachio, etc. all have odd shapes when looking at the top

of

> their heads. Can someone address this for me?

>

> We got more aggressive about repositioning, and asked them to at

> daycare, but definitely would fall short of the efforts I've seen

> many of you discuss. Nevertheless, my husband and I and other

family

> members were sure that her head was beginning to round out some at

> the bottom. We went back to CT for a 5 1/2 mo. free consult. My

> husband and I honestly expected them to say it was better. The

> therapist immediately said- the bulges over her ears are bigger.

> Let's take measurements. The measurements she took indicated a

slight

> amount of facial asymmetry (like 3mm), the same ratio of depth

> measurements and increased width measurements. Again, they took

> pictures and placed them side by side for us to look at. The

rounding

> at the bottom of her head is undeniably better. The top of her

head

> is still round, with maybe the forehead becoming ever so slightly

> flat. But the therapist said that overall she is worse, because of

> the increasing width vs. depth of her head. She said that the

height

> in the back was worse and that the angle of her head height/

forehead

> is worse (still moderate, however) and that she would recommend

the

> band. We were shocked! I can see what she is saying from the

> pictures, but is it not possible that her head will grow more

depth

> in future months- can it grow wide one month and deep the next?

Are

> we not on to a different issue (head width) than what we were sent

> there for in the first place (flat head)? I'm so confused.

>

> I don't know whether to seek a second opinion (maybe a specialist

> DOCTOR- the people at CT are 'therapists') or to think it is a

crock

> and continue repositioning and not worry about it. (Sidebar: My

older

> daughter has a small hemangioma under her eye. We decided not to

seek

> treatment for it and it has almost completely involuted by almost

age

> 3. Based on this, my gut is to leave this alone as well.)

>

> I read some comments at ivillage that were very interesting,

> especially someone wrote about the need for a new norm for the

> cephalic ratio (increased width vs. depth of head) due to the back

to

> sleep campaign. Any more insight would be greatly appreciated.

[Guest guest]

Hi,

Welcome to the group! I think those were my comments you were

alluding to from the other board... I'm glad you found this group

also, and I hope we can be of help!

It sounds as if your first consult with CT showed that your daughter

had some mild plagio/brachy just on the lower half of the back of

her head with mild bulges over the ears - from your description and

the ortho's assessment, it does indeed sound as if it were mild!

Not the classic, at least moderate deformational plagio/brachy you

would normally see on websites and such involving much larger areas

of the back of the head.

It's certainly possible for this " precurser " flatness observed in

your daughter to be a springboard to actual plagio or brachy if a

lot of backtime is still being spent on the minor problem area. The

bulges over the ears observed at your daughter's first consult would

seem to indicate that deformational pressure was already present

and " pushing " the head outward and forward overall. My own daughter

had marked bulges over both ears, too, but she had moderate

plagio/brachy that was very noticeable (progress pics at

photos/before and after/repositioned/Remy if you are interested.)

Do you agree that in spite of the lower part of your daughter's head

rounding out, that the bulges over the ears are larger than before?

Even if there is no obvious flattening of the back of her head (you

said it was still nicely round), time spent on her back could be

restricting optimum growth elongating the head, and making it wider

than the norm. I think this " cephalic ratio " worsening is what the

ortho noticed at the second consult.

In answer to your question, yes it is possible for your daughter's

headshape to elongate ratio-wise without orthotic intervention,

although it is impossible to predict if this will happen. I am very

happy to hear that your daughter doesn't have any of the classical

flatness so often seen in plagio/brachy babies, but the fact that

her cephalic ratio is worsening means that repo efforts are not

delivering on some level. I read in one of your posts that she is

in daycare? Enforcing repo at daycare is truly the bane of repo'ing

parents. One idea lauded by a repo'ing parent was the bumbo baby

seat, which she purchased and took to the daycare for them to use

with her baby www.bumbobabyseat.com , as well as many

unannouced " drop-in " visits to check on positioning. This device

offered an alternative to backtime and a bouncie chair. Perhaps you

could give this a try at daycare and at home. I typed up

the " brachy repo " document you referred to; I hope it can give you

some good tips. Is your daughter still sleeping on the back of her

head at night? If your ped okays it, side-sleeping would be truly

ideal in helping to prevent further widening of the head. Any time

at all in a swing would be the absolute worst for widening of the

head - can you eliminate this device altogether? One of the group

member here came up with a great idea for repo'ing in a bouncy chair

if you find you need to use one on occasion - she simply cut a

rectangle off of a foam bath support and placed it behind her baby's

neck while in the chair - it suspended the back of the baby's head

just off of the seatback so there was no pressure! There is a photo

of this idea in the files/repo headquarters folder.

Ultimately, the consults and measurements are just tools to help you

evaluate your options and make a treatment decision yourself for

your daughter. Even if you are not choosing banding at this time,

it is helpful for you to know that your daughter's headshape is

changing farther off of what is considered average or norm - it

gives you an opportunity to adjust your repo strategy before any

serious flattening occurs. Also, as you were told at your first

consult, we have heard of babies being turned away for being too

mild for treatment, so I don't think they are recommending treatment

where correction couldn't be achieved.

I would love to see a photo of your daughter if you have time to

post one.

Would you let me know if I can be of any help at all with any

repositioning problems or concerns?

Take care,

Christie (Mom to Repo'd Remy)

--- In Plagiocephaly , " cooper_ts " <tscmsu@h...>

wrote:

> I am hoping that someone here has insight to offer- sorry the

> background will be kinda long.

>

> At my daughter's 2 month ped. appt., he recommended repositioning.

I

> wish he had fully explained HOW to do it and how aggressive to be

or

> that I had put more effort into researching this at that point.

> Anyway, at her 4 month appt., her head was still flat across the

> lower part of her head with the right side being slightly more

flat

> (she does not have torticollis, though), so he gave us a

prescription

> for CT. We went at 4 1/2 months for a free consult. They took

> pictures and measurements.

>

> At that point, the top of her head was completely round. She just

had

> flattening in the lower back (increased on right), some small

bulging

> over her ears and some increased height to the top of the back of

her

> head. She had no facial asymmetry. By all accounts and these

> measurements, I considered her to have a mild case of plagio. The

CT

> therapist said mild to moderate, and said that it would be up to

us

> about the band. I'm not even really sure that it is considered

> plagio, since the top of her head was completely round- in all of

the

> online research I have done and pics I have seen, the babies with

> plagio/brachio, etc. all have odd shapes when looking at the top

of

> their heads. Can someone address this for me?

>

> We got more aggressive about repositioning, and asked them to at

> daycare, but definitely would fall short of the efforts I've seen

> many of you discuss. Nevertheless, my husband and I and other

family

> members were sure that her head was beginning to round out some at

> the bottom. We went back to CT for a 5 1/2 mo. free consult. My

> husband and I honestly expected them to say it was better. The

> therapist immediately said- the bulges over her ears are bigger.

> Let's take measurements. The measurements she took indicated a

slight

> amount of facial asymmetry (like 3mm), the same ratio of depth

> measurements and increased width measurements. Again, they took

> pictures and placed them side by side for us to look at. The

rounding

> at the bottom of her head is undeniably better. The top of her

head

> is still round, with maybe the forehead becoming ever so slightly

> flat. But the therapist said that overall she is worse, because of

> the increasing width vs. depth of her head. She said that the

height

> in the back was worse and that the angle of her head height/

forehead

> is worse (still moderate, however) and that she would recommend

the

> band. We were shocked! I can see what she is saying from the

> pictures, but is it not possible that her head will grow more

depth

> in future months- can it grow wide one month and deep the next?

Are

> we not on to a different issue (head width) than what we were sent

> there for in the first place (flat head)? I'm so confused.

>

> I don't know whether to seek a second opinion (maybe a specialist

> DOCTOR- the people at CT are 'therapists') or to think it is a

crock

> and continue repositioning and not worry about it. (Sidebar: My

older

> daughter has a small hemangioma under her eye. We decided not to

seek

> treatment for it and it has almost completely involuted by almost

age

> 3. Based on this, my gut is to leave this alone as well.)

>

> I read some comments at ivillage that were very interesting,

> especially someone wrote about the need for a new norm for the

> cephalic ratio (increased width vs. depth of head) due to the back

to

> sleep campaign. Any more insight would be greatly appreciated.

[Guest guest]

LOL. I totally agree about not having a clue about these things

until it's your children with them! Actually, my older daughter had

two hemangiomas- another one on her torso completely involuted by age

2. Until she got those, I had NO IDEA that you could have a

birthmark that was NOT THERE at birth (hers started developing after

she was 3 weeks old)!! I read lots about Dr. Waner when I was

researching her hemangiomas. I also recently read that he moved from

AR to NY?

> > I am hoping that someone here has insight to offer- sorry the

> > background will be kinda long.

> >

> > At my daughter's 2 month ped. appt., he recommended

repositioning.

> I

> > wish he had fully explained HOW to do it and how aggressive to be

> or

> > that I had put more effort into researching this at that point.

> > Anyway, at her 4 month appt., her head was still flat across the

> > lower part of her head with the right side being slightly more

> flat

> > (she does not have torticollis, though), so he gave us a

> prescription

> > for CT. We went at 4 1/2 months for a free consult. They took

> > pictures and measurements.

> >

> > At that point, the top of her head was completely round. She just

> had

> > flattening in the lower back (increased on right), some small

> bulging

> > over her ears and some increased height to the top of the back of

> her

> > head. She had no facial asymmetry. By all accounts and these

> > measurements, I considered her to have a mild case of plagio. The

> CT

> > therapist said mild to moderate, and said that it would be up to

> us

> > about the band. I'm not even really sure that it is considered

> > plagio, since the top of her head was completely round- in all of

> the

> > online research I have done and pics I have seen, the babies with

> > plagio/brachio, etc. all have odd shapes when looking at the top

> of

> > their heads. Can someone address this for me?

> >

> > We got more aggressive about repositioning, and asked them to at

> > daycare, but definitely would fall short of the efforts I've seen

> > many of you discuss. Nevertheless, my husband and I and other

> family

> > members were sure that her head was beginning to round out some

at

> > the bottom. We went back to CT for a 5 1/2 mo. free consult. My

> > husband and I honestly expected them to say it was better. The

> > therapist immediately said- the bulges over her ears are bigger.

> > Let's take measurements. The measurements she took indicated a

> slight

> > amount of facial asymmetry (like 3mm), the same ratio of depth

> > measurements and increased width measurements. Again, they took

> > pictures and placed them side by side for us to look at. The

> rounding

> > at the bottom of her head is undeniably better. The top of her

> head

> > is still round, with maybe the forehead becoming ever so slightly

> > flat. But the therapist said that overall she is worse, because

of

> > the increasing width vs. depth of her head. She said that the

> height

> > in the back was worse and that the angle of her head height/

> forehead

> > is worse (still moderate, however) and that she would recommend

> the

> > band. We were shocked! I can see what she is saying from the

> > pictures, but is it not possible that her head will grow more

> depth

> > in future months- can it grow wide one month and deep the next?

> Are

> > we not on to a different issue (head width) than what we were

sent

> > there for in the first place (flat head)? I'm so confused.

> >

> > I don't know whether to seek a second opinion (maybe a specialist

> > DOCTOR- the people at CT are 'therapists') or to think it is a

> crock

> > and continue repositioning and not worry about it. (Sidebar: My

> older

> > daughter has a small hemangioma under her eye. We decided not to

> seek

> > treatment for it and it has almost completely involuted by almost

> age

> > 3. Based on this, my gut is to leave this alone as well.)

> >

> > I read some comments at ivillage that were very interesting,

> > especially someone wrote about the need for a new norm for the

> > cephalic ratio (increased width vs. depth of head) due to the

back

> to

> > sleep campaign. Any more insight would be greatly appreciated.

[Guest guest]

Hi Terri,

It sounds like you definitely have a difficult decision. I too

would like to see the pics if you're able to scan them. All of us

mods who have been around here awhile will tell you that CT is very

honest and won't recommend a band if they don't think your child

would benefit. We have seen members be told that their child is too

mild, and many that are told it borderline and up to them, so if

they're recommending one I'd take that as an honest opinion. It

seems like you've done a great job in doing your research and know

that brachy is hard to correct w/repoing full time, let alone when

she's in day care and such. W/the brachy head shape, the head gets

pushed wider and taller, and what the band would do would be hold

those areas to allow the rest of her head to " catch up. " If you do

not have the time available to aggressively repo, I would recommend

a band simply to keep her head from getting any worse. I think you

really need to think in terms of if you'd be happy w/her head as is

if it didn't round out any, but you also need to take into account

that she is still young enough for it to worsen. It's alot to think

about though, and it's very time sensitive, so whatever you do just

make sure you're 100% okay with it. Good luck.

, mom to Hannah, DOCband #3 3/30

Cape Cod, Ma

> >

> > > I am hoping that someone here has insight to offer- sorry the

> > > background will be kinda long.

> > >

> > > At my daughter's 2 month ped. appt., he recommended

> repositioning.

> > I

> > > wish he had fully explained HOW to do it and how aggressive to

be

> > or

> > > that I had put more effort into researching this at that

point.

> > > Anyway, at her 4 month appt., her head was still flat across

the

> > > lower part of her head with the right side being slightly more

> > flat

> > > (she does not have torticollis, though), so he gave us a

> > prescription

> > > for CT. We went at 4 1/2 months for a free consult. They took

> > > pictures and measurements.

> > >

> > > At that point, the top of her head was completely round. She

just

> > had

> > > flattening in the lower back (increased on right), some small

> > bulging

> > > over her ears and some increased height to the top of the back

of

> > her

> > > head. She had no facial asymmetry. By all accounts and these

> > > measurements, I considered her to have a mild case of plagio.

The

> > CT

> > > therapist said mild to moderate, and said that it would be up

to

> > us

> > > about the band. I'm not even really sure that it is considered

> > > plagio, since the top of her head was completely round- in all

of

> > the

> > > online research I have done and pics I have seen, the babies

with

> > > plagio/brachio, etc. all have odd shapes when looking at the

top

> > of

> > > their heads. Can someone address this for me?

> > >

> > > We got more aggressive about repositioning, and asked them to

at

> > > daycare, but definitely would fall short of the efforts I've

seen

> > > many of you discuss. Nevertheless, my husband and I and other

> > family

> > > members were sure that her head was beginning to round out

some

> at

> > > the bottom. We went back to CT for a 5 1/2 mo. free consult.

My

> > > husband and I honestly expected them to say it was better. The

> > > therapist immediately said- the bulges over her ears are

bigger.

> > > Let's take measurements. The measurements she took indicated a

> > slight

> > > amount of facial asymmetry (like 3mm), the same ratio of depth

> > > measurements and increased width measurements. Again, they

took

> > > pictures and placed them side by side for us to look at. The

> > rounding

> > > at the bottom of her head is undeniably better. The top of her

> > head

> > > is still round, with maybe the forehead becoming ever so

slightly

> > > flat. But the therapist said that overall she is worse,

because

> of

> > > the increasing width vs. depth of her head. She said that the

> > height

> > > in the back was worse and that the angle of her head height/

> > forehead

> > > is worse (still moderate, however) and that she would

recommend

> > the

> > > band. We were shocked! I can see what she is saying from the

> > > pictures, but is it not possible that her head will grow more

> > depth

> > > in future months- can it grow wide one month and deep the

next?

> > Are

> > > we not on to a different issue (head width) than what we were

> sent

> > > there for in the first place (flat head)? I'm so confused.

> > >

> > > I don't know whether to seek a second opinion (maybe a

specialist

> > > DOCTOR- the people at CT are 'therapists') or to think it is a

> > crock

> > > and continue repositioning and not worry about it. (Sidebar:

My

> > older

> > > daughter has a small hemangioma under her eye. We decided not

to

> > seek

> > > treatment for it and it has almost completely involuted by

almost

> > age

> > > 3. Based on this, my gut is to leave this alone as well.)

> > >

> > > I read some comments at ivillage that were very interesting,

> > > especially someone wrote about the need for a new norm for the

> > > cephalic ratio (increased width vs. depth of head) due to the

> back

> > to

> > > sleep campaign. Any more insight would be greatly appreciated.