| 1. |
- Kahrs, Birgitte H., et al.
(författare)
-
Fetal rotation during vacuum extractions for prolonged labor : a prospective cohort study
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. - : Wiley. - 0001-6349. ; 97:8, s. 998-1005
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction: The aim of the study was to investigate fetal head rotation during vacuum extraction. Material and methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study from November 2013 to July 2016 in seven European hospitals. Fetal head position was determined with transabdominal or transperineal ultrasound and categorized as occiput anterior (OA), occiput transverse (OT) or occiput posterior (OP) position. Main outcome was the proportion of fetuses rotating during vacuum extraction. Secondary outcomes were conversion of delivery method, duration of vacuum extraction, umbilical artery pH <7.10 and agreement between clinical and ultrasound assessments. Results: The study population comprised 165 women. During vacuum extraction 117/119 (98%) remained in OA and two fetuses rotated to OP position. Rotation from OT to OA position occurred in 14/19 (74%) and to OP position in 5/19 (26%). Rotation from OP to OA position occurred in 15/25 (60%), and 10/25 (40%) fetuses remained in OP position. Delivery information was missing in two cases. The conversion rate from vacuum extraction to cesarean section or forceps was 10% in the OA group vs. 23% in the non-OA group; p < 0.05. The estimated duration of vacuum extraction was significantly shorter in OA fetuses, 7 min vs. 10 min (log rank test p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in umbilical artery pH < 7.10 between OA and non-OA position. Cohens Kappa of agreement between clinical and ultrasound assessments was 0.42 (95% CI 0.26–0.57). Conclusion: Most fetuses in OP or OT positions rotated to OA position during vacuum extraction, but the proportion of failed vacuum extractions remained high.
|
|
| 2. |
- Åhman, Annika, et al.
(författare)
-
Midwives’ and obstetricians’ views on appropriate obstetric sonography in Norway
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Sexual & Reproductive HealthCare. - : Elsevier. - 1877-5756 .- 1877-5764. ; 16, s. 1-5
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction: The primary aim of this study was to investigate midwives' and obstetricians' views on how many ultrasound examinations should be part of standard care during pregnancy in Norway.Material and methods: This study is a part of a larger study, the CROss-Country Ultrasound Study (CROCUS), an international investigation of midwives' and obstetricians' experiences of and views on the use of ultrasound. We distributed 400 questionnaires to respondents in all five health regions in Norway: 40 to municipal midwives, 180 to midwives working in hospitals and 180 to obstetricians. The questionnaire included specific questions about the appropriate number of examinations during pregnancy, examinations without medical indication, non-medical ultrasound, commercialisation and safety.Results: The response rate was 45%. Of the respondents, 58% reported satisfaction with the offer of one scheduled ultrasound examination during pregnancy, as recommended in the Norwegian guidelines. Health care professionals who used ultrasound themselves were significantly more likely to want to offer more ultrasound examinations: 52% of the ultrasound users wanted to offer two or more ultrasound examinations vs. 16% of the non-users (p < .01). The majority of obstetricians (80%) reported that pregnant women expect to undergo ultrasound examination, even in the absence of medical indication.Conclusion: The majority of Norwegian health care professionals participating in this study supported the national recommendation on ultrasound in pregnancy. Ultrasound users wanted to offer more ultrasound examinations during pregnancy, whereas non-users were generally content with the recommendation. The majority of respondents thought that commercialisation was not a problem at their institution, and reported that ultrasound is often performed without a medical indication. The ultrasound users thought that ultrasound is safe.
|
|
