PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 12641307

Rotational forceps: should these procedures be abandoned?

Joong Shin Park·Julian N Robinson·Errol R Norwitz
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Forceps delivery remains an important part of the obstetric armamentarium. When applied by practitioners skilled in their use, forceps delivery can quickly and safely deliver a fetus at risk. Unfortunately, forceps can also be an instrument of harm for the women or her infant. This is particularly true of rotational forceps. The goal of this monograph is to review in detail the indications, contraindications, technique, as well as risks and complications of forceps delivery, with particular attention to rotational forceps. We conclude by asking the question: Should rotational forceps be abandoned altogether?

Explore related subjects

Delivery, ObstetricFemaleHumansObstetrical ForcepsPerineumPregnancyRisk FactorsVersion, FetalJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Joong Shin Park, Julian N Robinson, Errol R Norwitz. 2003. Rotational forceps: should these procedures be abandoned?. https://doi.org/10.1053/sper.2003.50017

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Effects of teamwork training on adverse outcomes and process of care in labor and delivery: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of teamwork training on the occurrence of adverse outcomes and process of care in labor and delivery. METHODS: A cluster-randomized controlled trial was conducted at seven intervention and eight control hospitals. The intervention was a standardized teamwork training curriculum based on crew resource management that emphasized communication and team structure. The primary outcome was the proportion of deliveries at 20 weeks or more of gestation in which one or more adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes or both occurred (Adverse Outcome Index). Additional outcomes included 11 clinical process measures. RESULTS: A total of 1,307 personnel were trained and 28,536 deliveries analyzed. At baseline, there were no differences in demographic or delivery characteristics between the groups. The mean Adverse Outcome Index prevalence was similar in the control and intervention groups, both at baseline and after implementation of teamwork training (9.4% versus 9.0% and 7.2% versus 8.3%, respectively). The intracluster correlation coefficient was 0.015, with a resultant wide confidence interval for the difference in mean Adverse Outcome Index between groups (-5.6% to 3.2%). One process measure, the time from the decision to perform an immediate cesarean delivery to the incision, differed significantly after team training (33.3 minutes versus 21.2 minutes, P=.03). CONCLUSION: Training, as was conducted and implemented, did not transfer to a detectable impact in this study. The Adverse Outcome Index could be an important tool for comparing obstetric outcomes within and between institutions to help guide quality improvement. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: (www.ClinicalTrials.gov), NCT00381056 LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Delivery, Obstetric↗