[Couder's maneuver. Knowledge and practices in a French university maternity hospital]. / Manœuvre de Couder. Connaissances et pratiques dans une maternité universitaire française.

BACKGROUND: During childbirth, the performance of a systematic Couder's maneuver could be linked to a reduction in the risk of perineal tear. OBJECTIVE: To know the practices and knowledge of childbirth professionals regarding the Couder's maneuver. To measure the effect of a training program for juniors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Single-center questionnaire survey of senior and junior obstetricians and midwives. Before-and-after study in juniors to evaluate maneuver training. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-five caregivers responded to the questionnaire: (19 physicians and 46 senior midwives; 21 residents and 39 midwifery students). Only one third of the respondents said they practiced the Couder's maneuver "always or almost always" (41/125, 32.8%) and less than one third felt "very comfortable" with the maneuver (34/125, 27.2%), with large differences according to profession and senior vs junior status. Being a doctor (vs midwife) was significantly related to systematic or frequent practice of the maneuver (70.0 vs 15.3%, ORMH=42.7 [9.4; 192.3]) as was being a senior (vs junior) (46.2 vs 18.3%, ORMH=15.9 [3.5; 72.9]). Less than half of the seniors surveyed had received education in maneuvering. Of those who did not practice the maneuver, the majority did not consider its systematic practice to be useful (19/26, 73.1%), and one third considered it potentially harmful (8/26, 30.8%). Theoretical and practical training of the juniors significantly improved their knowledge. CONCLUSION: There are great differences in the practice of the Couder's maneuver. It deserves to be better known, practiced and evaluated.

[Expert consensus from the College of French Gynecologists and Obstetricians: Management of nausea and vomiting of pregnancy and hyperemesis gravidarum]. / Consensus formalisé d'experts du Collège national des gynécologues et obstétriciens français : prise en charge des nausées et vomissements gravidiques et de l'hyperémèse gravidique.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the management of patients with 1st trimester nausea and vomiting and hyperemesis gravidarum. METHODS: A panel of experts participated in a formal consensus process, including focus groups and two Delphi rounds. RESULTS: Hyperemesis gravidarum is distinguished from nausea and vomiting during pregnancy by weight loss≥5 % or signs of dehydration or a PUQE score≥7. Hospitalization is proposed when there is, at least, one of the following criteria: weight loss≥10%, one or more clinical signs of dehydration, PUQE (Pregnancy Unique Quantification of Emesis and nausea) score≥13, hypokalemia<3.0mmol/L, hyponatremia<120mmol/L, elevated serum creatinine>100µmol/L or resistance to treatment. Prenatal vitamins and iron supplementation should be stopped without stopping folic acid supplementation. Diet and lifestyle should be adjusted according to symptoms. Aromatherapy is not to be used. If the PUQE score is<6, even in the absence of proof of their benefit, ginger, pyridoxine (B6 vitamin), acupuncture or electrostimulation can be used, even in the absence of proof of benefit. It is proposed that drugs or combinations of drugs associated with the least severe and least frequent side effects should always be chosen for uses in 1st, 2nd or 3rd intention, taking into account the absence of superiority of a class over another to reduce the symptoms of nausea and vomiting of pregnancy and hypermesis gravidarum. To prevent Gayet Wernicke encephalopathy, Vitamin B1 must systematically be administered for hyperemesis gravidarum needing parenteral rehydration. Patients hospitalized for hyperemesis gravidarum should not be placed in isolation (put in the dark, confiscation of the mobile phone or ban on visits, etc.). Psychological support should be offered to all patients with hyperemesis gravidarum as well as information on patient' associations involved in supporting these women and their families. When returning home after hospitalization, care will be organized around a referring doctor. CONCLUSION: This work should contribute to improving the care of women with hyperemesis gravidarum. However, given the paucity in number and quality of the literature, researchers must invest in the field of nausea and vomiting in pregnancy, and HG to identify strategies to improve the quality of life of women with nausea and vomiting in pregnancy or hyperemesis gravidarum.

Fetal heart rate classification in routine use: Do your prefer a 3-tier or a 5-tier classification?

OBJECTIVE: To assess the current use of a five-tier fetal heart rate (FHR) classification system (National College of French Obstetricians and Gynecologists, CNGOF, 2007) and of a three-tier system (Federation International of Gynecology and Obstetrics, FIGO, 2015). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a single-center prospective study conducted in April 2016. Midwives were asked to classify FHR hourly during their patients' labors according to two classification systems (CNGOF and FIGO). For each system the midwives rated from 0 to 10 the following elements after delivery: ease of FHR classification, the memorization of the classification, access to routine use, and help with the decision of a second-line examination. Finally, they had to choose which classification system seemed most helpful in their clinical practice. RESULTS: Forty-six patients were included in the study. The median score for the ease of FHR classification according to the CNGOF system was 7, versus 8 according to the FIGO system (p<0.05). The median score for the ease of remembering the classification was 4 for CNGOF versus 8 for FIGO (p<0.05). The FIGO classification system was considered the easiest to use in 76% of cases and the CNGOF system was the most helpful in 61% of cases. The CNGOF system was seen as a help in deciding on a second-line examination in 70% of cases and the FIGO was a help in 63% of cases. CONCLUSION: The three-tier FIGO classification system seemed easier to use but the five-tier CNGOF classification system was more helpful. The choice of which system to use should be discussed within each medical team.