RESUMO
Objectives: The aim of our study is to evaluate the impact of the introduction of a maneuverable vacuum extractor cup on the length of hospital stay after assisted vaginal birth in nulliparous women in a hospital where no vacuum devices were used. Methods: This single center retrospective analytical study included two groups of nulliparous women who had undergone an assisted vaginal birth. The 2 groups differ according to the availability or not of a maneuverable vacuum extractor cup. The first group includes the last 54 instrumental births until May 2017, when only obstetric forceps and Thierry's spatulas were available in our center; the second group includes the first 54 instrumental births since May 2018 in our center, when obstetric forceps, Thierry's spatulas and maneuverable vacuum extractor cup were available. Maneuverable vacuum extractor cups had been available for 12 months in the second group. Results: In the no vacuum cup group, Kjelland forceps and Thierry's spatulas were used in 29 (53.7%) and 25 (46.3%) of the 54 assisted vaginal births, respectively. In the vacuum available group, a vacuum cup was chosen in 30 (55.6%), Kjelland forceps were used in 18 (33.3%) and Thierry's spatulas in 6 (11.1%) of the assisted vaginal births. 22 women (40.7%) had a postpartum hospital stay longer than 3 days in the group with no maneuverable vacuum extractor cup availability, versus 3 women (5.6%) in the group with availability of a maneuverable vacuum extractor cup, p<0.001. Average postpartum hospital stay length was 3.17±0.803 days versus 2.81±0.585, p<0.001. There was also a significant reduction in the number of episiotomies. Conclusion: The introduction of a maneuverable vacuum extractor cup in a center where only forceps and Thierry's spatulas had been used resulted in a decrease in postpartum hospital stay in nulliparous women.(AU)
Objetivos: El objetivo de nuestro estudio es evaluar el impacto de la introducción de una ventosa obstétrica con cazoleta maniobrable en la duración de la estancia hospitalaria tras parto instrumental en mujeres nulíparas en un hospital donde no se utilizaban ventosas obstétricas. Métodos: Este estudio de cohortes retrospectivo unicéntrico incluyó 2 grupos de mujeres nulíparas sometidas a parto instrumental. Los 2 grupos se diferencian según la disponibilidad o no de ventosa obstétrica en el centro. El primer grupo se compone de las últimas 54 mujeres a las que se les asistió un parto instrumental hasta mayo del 2017, cuando solo había disponibilidad de fórceps obstétricos y espátulas de Thierry en nuestro centro; el segundo grupo se compone de las primeras 54 mujeres a las que se les asistió un parto instrumental desde mayo del 2018 en nuestro centro, cuando había disponibilidad de fórceps obstétricos, de espátulas de Thierry y de ventosa obstétrica con cazoleta maniobrable (esta última desde hacía 12 meses). Resultados: En el grupo sin disponibilidad de ventosa obstétrica, se utilizaron fórceps de Kjelland y espátulas de Thierry en 29 (53,7%) y 25 (46,3%) de los 54 partos instrumentales, respectivamente. En el grupo con disponibilidad de ventosa, se usó la ventosa en 30 (55,6%), fórceps de Kjelland en 18 (33,3%) y espátulas de Thierry en 6 (11,1%) de los partos instrumentales; 22 mujeres (40,7%) tuvieron una estancia hospitalaria tras el parto mayor de 3 días en el grupo sin disponibilidad de ventosa, frente a 3 mujeres (5,6%) en el grupo con disponibilidad de ventosa, p<0,001. La duración media de la estancia hospitalaria tras el parto fue de 3,17±0,803 días frente a 2,81±0,585, p<0,001. También hubo una reducción significativa en el número de episiotomías.(AU)
Assuntos
Humanos , Feminino , Período Pós-Parto , Forceps Obstétrico , Hospitalização , Vácuo-Extração/efeitos adversos , Vácuo-Extração/métodos , Vácuo-Extração/estatística & dados numéricos , Ginecologia , Obstetrícia , Unidade Hospitalar de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia , Complicações na Gravidez , Estudos de Coortes , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
The purpose of our study is to compare the maternal and neonatal outcomes of induction of labor (IOL) versus expectant management at 39 weeks of gestation. We conducted a single-centered, prospective, observational study of nulliparous singleton women at 39 weeks or more. We compared the maternal and perinatal outcomes. Of 408 nulliparous women, 132 women were IOL group and 276 women were expectant management group. IOL and expectant group had similar cesarean delivery rate (18.2% vs. 15.9%, p = 0.570). The delivery time from admission was longer in IOL group (834 ± 527 vs. 717 ± 469 min, p = 0.040). The IOL group was less likely to have Apgar score at 5 min < 7 than in expectant group (0.8% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.023). Multivariate analysis showed that IOL at 39 weeks was not an independent risk factor for cesarean delivery (relative risk 0.64, 95% confidence interval: 0.28−1.45, p = 0.280). Maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes, including cesarean delivery rate, were similar to women in IOL at 39 weeks of gestation compared to expectant management in nulliparous women. IOL at 39 weeks of gestation could be recommended even when the indication of IOL is not definite.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The Odon Device™ is a new device for assisted vaginal birth that employs an air cuff around the fetal head for traction. Assisted vaginal birth (AVB) is a vital health intervention that can result in better outcomes for mothers and their babies when complications arise in the second stage of labour. Unfortunately, instruments for AVB (forceps and ventouse) are often not used in settings where there is most clinical need often due to lack of training and resources, resulting in maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality which could have been prevented. This is often due to a lack of trained operators as well as difficulties in the sterilisation and maintenance of AVB devices. This novel, single use device has the potential to mitigate these difficulties as it is single use and is potentially simpler to use than forceps and ventouse. All the studies of the Odon Device to date (pre-clinical, preliminary developmental and clinical) suggest that the Odon Device does not present a higher risk to mothers or babies compared to current standard care, and recruitment to intrapartum research exploring the device is feasible and acceptable to women. The first study in which the Odon Device was used in clinically indicated conditions (the ASSIST Study) reported a lower efficacy than those reported with established devices. The reasons need to be explored, specifically focussing on learning curve, the technique of the doctors using this new device and potential modifications to device design. A follow-on clinical study to further investigate the efficacy and safety of the Odon Device in its indicated use, the ASSIST II Study, is therefore being undertaken. METHODS: The primary feasibility outcome is study feasibility (recruitment and retention rates) whilst the primary clinical outcome successful vaginal birth completed with the Odon Device. Key secondary feasibility outcomes include participant withdrawal, compliance in data collection and acceptability of the device to women and operators. Secondary clinical outcomes include maternal, neonatal and device outcomes. Safety data will be reviewed following every birth exploring maternal, neonatal and device risks. Using A'Hern approach for sample size calculation, we aim to recruit 104 women requiring an assisted vaginal birth for a recognised clinical indication. Assuming an AVB success rate of 65% or more, a one-sided alpha risk of 5% and power of 90%. DISCUSSION: The data from the ASSIST II Study will provide the information required regarding acceptability, recruitment, outcome data collection, device design, technique of device use and operator learning curve in order to design a future randomised controlled trial of the Odon Device versus current modes of assisted vaginal birth. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN registration: 38829082 (prospectively registered July 26, 2019).
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: In many low- to middle-income countries (LMIC) assisted vaginal birth rates have fallen, while caesarean section (CS) rates have increased, with potentially deleterious consequences for maternal and perinatal mortality. AIMS: To review birth mode and perinatal mortality in a large LMIC hospital with strict labour management protocols and expertise in vacuum extraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study at Port Moresby General Hospital in Papua New Guinea. Birth registers from 1977 to 2015 (39 years) were reviewed. Overall and modified (fresh stillbirths and early neonatal deaths ≥500 g) perinatal mortality rates (PMRs) were calculated by birthweight/birth mode. RESULTS: There were 365 056 births (5215 in 1977; 14 927 in 2015), of which 14 179 (3.9%) were vacuum extractions, 609 (0.2%) forceps births and 14 747 (4.4%) CS (increase from 2% to 5%). The failure rate of vacuum extraction was 2.5% (range 0.5-5.4%). Symphysiotomy was employed for 184 births. From 1989 to 2015, the modified mean PMR for babies ≥2500 g was 8.1/1000 births (range 5.6-12.1; 6.9 in 2015), 9.1/1000 for babies ≥1500 g (7.3-14.8; 9.1 in 2015) and 7.5/1000 (0-21.7; 9.0 in 2015) for vacuum extractions (98% were ≥2500 g). The overall PMR for these years was 29.7/1000 births. CONCLUSIONS: In an LMIC with rapidly increasing birth numbers a comparatively low PMR can be achieved while maintaining low CS rates. This may be in part accomplished through strict use of second-stage protocols, perinatal audit, and supportive training that promotes judicious and proficient use of vacuum extraction and CS.
