update on going back and forth

[Guest guest]

I saw our LO today and he took measurements of both boys. Gage

(Brachy) went from 103% to 96% cephalic index, and even though that

is well above average, he really doesn't look bad...prior to

treatment his head was actually 4mm wider than front to back and now

it is 5mm longer front to back than it is wide. My daughter (never

banded) was always in the highest percentile for head circumference,

so I guess I just have big headed kids, i don't know...Eli (Plagio)

went from 10 mm assymetric to 5 mm assymetric, but his flatness is

lower on the head, which is not where the measurements are taken

from. So, he actually looks more assymetric than the measurements

show. However, our LO explained to me that the band usually doesn't

correct as much down low since the brain doesn't grow in that area,

and that my son's head shape is actually more difficult to correct

because of this... He discouraged me from relying too much on the

numbers and I can see why...they don't really represent the actual

look and shape of their heads. And he warned that we may see little

to no correction if we decide to band again, but there's always a

chance that we will...and for me it would be worth it even if he only

improved 2 mm. Another thing, I'm pretty sure Aetna wouldn't cover a

2nd band based on the small amount of assymetry, and I definately

don't want to go through the awful appeal process. I am still

running through the pros and cons, but am more leaning towards not

banding at this point. Any advice is greatly appreciated and thank

you to those that have already replied...

Shenelle

Katy, TX

[Guest guest]

Hi Katy-

It's hard enough making decisions for one baby at a time, I can't

imagine doing it for two! It sounds like you're leaning towards a

good choice here. I don't think you mentioned how old your boys are.

My son has plagio on the back right side of his head. Very early on,

it was especially flat up the back of his neck (what I think you're

calling " down low " ). We were told at 4 months old that he wouldn't

need a helmet and that it would correct on its own. So we went with

that diagnosis and are only now pursuing a helmet for the excessive

forehead bossing and ear assymetry he still has at 17 months. The

flat spot itself has improved tremendously on its own (although

still very visable!) and I would say that most of that improvement

has been " down low. " And trust me, I know all about big heads! My

son was almost 11 pounds at birth, and is constantly >98% on all the

growth charts. So I really believe that you will eventually see some

natural correction down there. Again, I don't know what age we're

dealing with, but at least in my experience, a year does improve a

lot on the back of the head. If my son's flat spot was the only

issue, I would not even think of banding at this point because the

natural improvement has been great enough for me to see and be happy

with. It's just the forehead bossing primarily, and ear assymetry

that still bother me.

In any case, I just wanted to share my experience with that part of

the head. I hope it's encouraging!

Good luck!

in Raleigh

Jake-17m DocBand 2/11/08

>

> I saw our LO today and he took measurements of both boys. Gage

> (Brachy) went from 103% to 96% cephalic index, and even though

that

> is well above average, he really doesn't look bad...prior to

> treatment his head was actually 4mm wider than front to back and

now

> it is 5mm longer front to back than it is wide. My daughter (never

> banded) was always in the highest percentile for head

circumference,

> so I guess I just have big headed kids, i don't know...Eli

(Plagio)

> went from 10 mm assymetric to 5 mm assymetric, but his flatness is

> lower on the head, which is not where the measurements are taken

> from. So, he actually looks more assymetric than the measurements

> show. However, our LO explained to me that the band usually

doesn't

> correct as much down low since the brain doesn't grow in that

area,

> and that my son's head shape is actually more difficult to correct

> because of this... He discouraged me from relying too much on the

> numbers and I can see why...they don't really represent the actual

> look and shape of their heads. And he warned that we may see

little

> to no correction if we decide to band again, but there's always a

> chance that we will...and for me it would be worth it even if he

only

> improved 2 mm. Another thing, I'm pretty sure Aetna wouldn't

cover a

> 2nd band based on the small amount of assymetry, and I definately

> don't want to go through the awful appeal process. I am still

> running through the pros and cons, but am more leaning towards not

> banding at this point. Any advice is greatly appreciated and

thank

> you to those that have already replied...

>

> Shenelle

> Katy, TX

>

[Guest guest]

Hi ,

I did forget to mention age...they are 10 mos right now. Like you, I

was told at their 4 mo check up that everything would correct itself,

so we didn't actually get them in the bands til they were around 7.5

mos old. (after relentless pursuit of course) I am very encouraged to

hear about the flatness improving in that lower region (upper neck

area). I feel like, at this point, the assymetry will probably not be

very noticeable once their hair grows in fully, but it's hard making

such a big decision based on hope alone. I'm finding as I go through

this process that maybe I'm a bit of a control person and

unfortunately this is just not going to be something I have much

control over...I just wanna do the best for my kids, as anyone

does... but the hard part is deciding what the " best " is...

Shenelle

Katy, TX

> >

> > I saw our LO today and he took measurements of both boys. Gage

> > (Brachy) went from 103% to 96% cephalic index, and even though

> that

> > is well above average, he really doesn't look bad...prior to

> > treatment his head was actually 4mm wider than front to back and

> now

> > it is 5mm longer front to back than it is wide. My daughter

(never

> > banded) was always in the highest percentile for head

> circumference,

> > so I guess I just have big headed kids, i don't know...Eli

> (Plagio)

> > went from 10 mm assymetric to 5 mm assymetric, but his flatness

is

> > lower on the head, which is not where the measurements are taken

> > from. So, he actually looks more assymetric than the measurements

> > show. However, our LO explained to me that the band usually

> doesn't

> > correct as much down low since the brain doesn't grow in that

> area,

> > and that my son's head shape is actually more difficult to

correct

> > because of this... He discouraged me from relying too much on the

> > numbers and I can see why...they don't really represent the

actual

> > look and shape of their heads. And he warned that we may see

> little

> > to no correction if we decide to band again, but there's always a

> > chance that we will...and for me it would be worth it even if he

> only

> > improved 2 mm. Another thing, I'm pretty sure Aetna wouldn't

> cover a

> > 2nd band based on the small amount of assymetry, and I definately

> > don't want to go through the awful appeal process. I am still

> > running through the pros and cons, but am more leaning towards

not

> > banding at this point. Any advice is greatly appreciated and

> thank

> > you to those that have already replied...

> >

> > Shenelle

> > Katy, TX

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Shenelle-

So sorry about the name mix up! I'm sure I was in a hurry and just

zeroed in on Katy (if you had been from San , TX, I probably

would have stopped and looked again!).

Anyway, I know it's a tough decision to make. Part of me would say

go for the second band just to try, but if they specifically said it

won't help that part of the head, it seems pointless. But then

again, if you do see even a 2mm correction, maybe it would be worth

it and maybe that last 2mm would make all the difference. You might

want to check the Older Plagio message board and ask the question

about the lower part of the head/upper part of the neck. Maybe some

of those moms can tell you a little better if they've seen any

improvement in that area on its own. Or maybe someone else will

chime in here with further help. I will say, I gave my son a bath

last night and there's no question, he still has plagio. I think my

first response to you made it sound like his flat spot was minimal,

but it really isn't. But it definitely is better than it was a year

ago. So I do believe in SOME natural correction, it just hasn't been

enough in our case. We're pursuing the band to help speed up that

natural process and hopefully fix his forehead bossing if nothing

else. I'm hoping we see at least some results!

Good luck with your decision!

in Raleigh

Jake-17m DocBand 2/11/08

> > >

> > > I saw our LO today and he took measurements of both boys.

Gage

> > > (Brachy) went from 103% to 96% cephalic index, and even though

> > that

> > > is well above average, he really doesn't look bad...prior to

> > > treatment his head was actually 4mm wider than front to back

and

> > now

> > > it is 5mm longer front to back than it is wide. My daughter

> (never

> > > banded) was always in the highest percentile for head

> > circumference,

> > > so I guess I just have big headed kids, i don't know...Eli

> > (Plagio)

> > > went from 10 mm assymetric to 5 mm assymetric, but his

flatness

> is

> > > lower on the head, which is not where the measurements are

taken

> > > from. So, he actually looks more assymetric than the

measurements

> > > show. However, our LO explained to me that the band usually

> > doesn't

> > > correct as much down low since the brain doesn't grow in that

> > area,

> > > and that my son's head shape is actually more difficult to

> correct

> > > because of this... He discouraged me from relying too much on

the

> > > numbers and I can see why...they don't really represent the

> actual

> > > look and shape of their heads. And he warned that we may see

> > little

> > > to no correction if we decide to band again, but there's

always a

> > > chance that we will...and for me it would be worth it even if

he

> > only

> > > improved 2 mm. Another thing, I'm pretty sure Aetna wouldn't

> > cover a

> > > 2nd band based on the small amount of assymetry, and I

definately

> > > don't want to go through the awful appeal process. I am still

> > > running through the pros and cons, but am more leaning towards

> not

> > > banding at this point. Any advice is greatly appreciated and

> > thank

> > > you to those that have already replied...

> > >

> > > Shenelle

> > > Katy, TX

> > >

> >

>