Instrumental delivery and ultrasound : a multicentre randomised controlled trial of ultrasound assessment of the fetal head position versus standard care as an approach to prevent morbidity at instrumental delivery
Open Access
- 11 April 2014
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
- Vol. 121 (8) , 1029-1038
Abstract
Objective: To determine whether the use of ultrasound can reduce the incidence of incorrect diagnosis of the fetal head position at instrumental delivery and subsequent morbidity.Design: Two‐arm, parallel, randomised trial, conducted from June 2011 to December 2012.Setting: Two maternity hospitals in the Republic of Ireland.Sample: A cohort of 514 nulliparous women at term (≥37 weeks of gestation) with singleton cephalic pregnancies, aiming to deliver vaginally, were recruited prior to an induction of labour or in early labour.Methods: If instrumental delivery was required, women who had provided written consent were randomised to receive clinical assessment (standard care) or ultrasound scan and clinical assessment (ultrasound). [Correction added on 17 April 2014, after first online publication: Sentence was amended.]Main outcome measure: Incorrect diagnosis of the fetal head position.Results: The incidence of incorrect diagnosis was significantly lower in the ultrasound group than the standard care group (4/257, 1.6%, versus 52/257, 20.2%; odds ratio 0.06; 95% confidence interval 0.02–0.19; P < 0.001). The decision to delivery interval was similar in both groups (ultrasound mean 13.8 minutes, SD 8.7 minutes, versus standard care mean 14.6 minutes, SD 10.1 minutes, P = 0.35). The incidence of maternal and neonatal complications, failed instrumental delivery, and caesarean section was not significantly different between the two groups.Conclusions: An ultrasound assessment prior to instrumental delivery reduced the incidence of incorrect diagnosis of the fetal head position without delaying delivery, but did not prevent morbidity. A more integrated clinical skills‐based approach is likely to be required to prevent adverse outcomes at instrumental delivery.Keywords
Funding Information
- Health Research Board of Ireland (POR/2010/55)
This publication has 27 references indexed in Scilit:
- Study Protocol. IDUS – Instrumental delivery & ultrasound. A multi-centre randomised controlled trial of ultrasound assessment of the fetal head position versus standard care as an approach to prevent morbidity at instrumental deliveryBMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 2012
- Fear of failure: Are we doing too many trials of instrumental delivery in theatre?Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 2008
- Cohort study of the decision to delivery interval and neonatal outcome for emergency operative vaginal deliveryAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2007
- Caesarean delivery in the second stage of labourBMJ, 2006
- Vaginal versus ultrasound examination of fetal occiput position during the second stage of laborAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2004
- Frequency and natural history of subdural haemorrhages in babies and relation to obstetric factorsThe Lancet, 2004
- Intrapartum fetal head position II: comparison between transvaginal digital examination and transabdominal ultrasound assessment during the second stage of laborUltrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2002
- Intrapartum sonography to determine fetal head positionThe Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine, 2002
- Early maternal and neonatal morbidity associated with operative delivery in second stage of labour: a cohort studyThe Lancet, 2001
- Effect of Mode of Delivery in Nulliparous Women on Neonatal Intracranial InjuryNew England Journal of Medicine, 1999