The OdonAssist inflatable device for assisted vaginal birth-the ASSIST II study (United Kingdom).

BACKGROUND: Decreasing rates of assisted vaginal birth have been paralleled with increasing rates of cesarean deliveries over the last 40 years. The OdonAssist is a novel device for assisted vaginal birth. Iterative changes to clinical parameters, device design, and technique have been made to improve device efficacy and usability. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine if the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of the OdonAssist device were sufficient to justify conducting a future randomized controlled trial. STUDY DESIGN: An open-label nonrandomized study of 104 participants having a clinically indicated assisted vaginal birth using the OdonAssist was undertaken at Southmead Hospital, Bristol, United Kingdom. Data were also collected from participants who consented to participate in the study but for whom trained OdonAssist operators were not available, providing a nested cohort. The primary clinical outcome was the proportion of births successfully expedited with the OdonAssist. Secondary outcomes included clinical, patient-reported, operator-reported, device and health care utilization. Neonatal outcome data were reviewed at day 28, and maternal outcomes were investigated up to day 90. Given that the number of successful OdonAssist births was ≥61 out of 104, the hypothesis of a poor rate of 50% was rejected in favor of a good rate of ≥65%. RESULTS: Between August 2019 and June 2021, 941 (64%) of the 1471 approached, eligible participants consented to participate. Of these, 104 received the OdonAssist intervention. Birth was assisted in all cephalic vertex fetal positions, at all stations ≥1 cm below the ischial spines (with or without regional analgesia). The OdonAssist was effective in 69 of the 104 (66%) cases, consistent with the hypothesis of a good efficacy rate. There were no serious device-related maternal or neonatal adverse reactions, and there were no serious adverse device effects. Only 4% of neonatal soft tissue bruising in the successful OdonAssist group was considered device-related, as opposed to 20% and 23% in the unsuccessful OdonAssist group and the nested cohort, respectively. Participants reported high birth perception scores. All practitioners found the device use to be straightforward. CONCLUSION: Recruitment to an interventional study of a new device for assisted vaginal birth is feasible; 64% of eligible participants were willing to participate. The success rate of the OdonAssist was comparable to that of the Kiwi OmniCup when introduced in the same unit in 2002, meeting the threshold for a randomized controlled trial to compare the OdonAssist with current standard practice. There were no disadvantages of study participation in terms of maternal and neonatal outcomes. There were potential advantages of using the OdonAssist, particularly reduced neonatal soft tissue injury. The same application technique is used for all fetal positions, with all operators deeming the device straightforward to use. This study provides important data to inform future study design.

Outcomes of the novel Odon Device in indicated operative vaginal birth.

BACKGROUND: No new method of assisting vaginal birth has been introduced into clinical practice since the development of the vacuum extractor in the 1950s. The Odon Device is a new device that employs a circumferential air cuff over the fetal head to assist birth. In this study, the Odon Device has been used to assist vaginal birth for standard clinical indications. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the clinical impact, safety, and acceptability of the Odon Device to women, their babies, and clinicians and to assess the feasibility of recruiting women to an interventional intrapartum research study. STUDY DESIGN: This is a nonrandomized, single-arm interventional feasibility study of the Odon Device for operative vaginal birth undertaken in a single maternity unit: Southmead Hospital, Bristol, United Kingdom. The Odon Device was used to assist birth in 40 women who required the birth to be assisted for suspected fetal compromise and/or prolonged second stage of labor. The primary clinical outcome was the proportion of births successfully assisted with the Odon Device, and the primary feasibility outcome was the proportion of eligible women who were approached and who agreed to participate. Neonatal outcome data were reviewed at day 28, and maternal outcomes were investigated up to day 90. RESULTS: Between October 2018 and January 2019, 298 of 384 approached, eligible women (77.6%) consented to participate. Of these women, 40 received the intervention-the use of the Odon Device. Birth was assisted in all cephalic (occiput anterior, occiput transverse, and occiput posterior) fetal positions, at all stations at or below the ischial spine and with or without regional analgesia. The Odon Device was effective in 19 of 40 cases (48%). Of the 40 births, 21 (52.5%) required additional assistance: 18 of 40 births (45%) were completed using nonrotational forceps, 1 of 40 births (3%) required rotational forceps, and 2 of 40 births (5%) required an emergency cesarean delivery. There was no serious maternal or neonatal adverse event related to the use of the device, and there was no serious adverse device effect. There were 4 devices (10%) that were ineffective because of a manufacturing fault. Furthermore, 39 of 40 women (98%) reported a high birth perception score. All practitioners were able to use the device as intended, although some steps in using the device were reported to be easier to perform (setup and deflation of air chamber) than others (application of the device and withdrawal of the applicator). CONCLUSION: Recruitment to an interventional study of a new device for operative vaginal birth was feasible; 78% of eligible women were willing to participate, often expressing an aspiration for an alternative to forceps and vacuum. The success rate of the Odon Device was lower than reported success rates of vacuum and forceps; however, in this study, the device had been used to assist birth for standard clinical indications. There was no significant maternal or neonatal safety concern associated with the use of the device, although the number of births studied was small. Further feasibility study to establish iterative changes to the device, technique, and clinical indications is necessary.

When should women be recruited to intrapartum research projects? A retrospective review.

OBJECTIVE: To review and describe the impact of varied recruitment processes in two intrapartum studies. DESIGN: Retrospective review of one prospective cohort study and one pilot randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Australian tertiary referral hospital. POPULATION: Women with term, cephalic singleton pregnancies. METHODS: Recruitment processes in one observational and one interventional study examining the management of occipitoposterior position in labor were reviewed. Data concerning recruitment and serial attrition for these studies were collected. The value of allowing consent in early labor in addition to consent in the antenatal period was assessed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Relative proportions of women participating compared with the numbers approached and recruited. RESULTS: One in 48 women approached about the observational study agreed to participate and then had a fetus in occipitoposterior position. One in 33 women in the intervention study were eventually randomized. Women approached in early labor were more likely to agree to participate (77% vs. 58%; p < 0.0001), more likely to have an ultrasound scan during labor (40% vs. 15%; p < 0.0001) and more likely to be randomized to intervention (4% vs. 1.5%; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Intrapartum research is associated with low rates of recruitment and these rates may be improved by asking women to provide informed consent during labor rather than the antenatal period. It is important to consider ways to facilitate randomized controlled trials involving women in labor to advance evidence-based care in this environment. This should include prospective research that seeks to define the best approach to patient recruitment.

The ASSIST Study - The BD Odon Device for assisted vaginal birth: a safety and feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Assisted vaginal birth 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 assisted vaginal birth (forceps and ventouse) are often not utilised in settings where there is most clinical need, resulting in maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality which could have been prevented. The BD Odon Device is a new device for assisted vaginal birth that may be able to address this unmet need. However, before dissemination, the device requires evaluation in robust clinical trials. A feasibility study to investigate the clinical impact, safety, and acceptability of the BD Odon Device for assisted vaginal birth is therefore planned. This will provide further information on acceptability, recruitment, and the outcome data required to design a future randomised controlled trial of the BD Odon Device versus Kiwi ventouse. METHODS: Forty women who require an assisted vaginal birth for a recognised clinical indication will have the birth assisted with the BD Odon Device. The primary outcome is successful vaginal birth completed with the BD Odon Device. Secondary clinical outcomes include maternal and neonatal outcomes, and maternal and practitioner satisfaction. Safety data will be reviewed following every birth. DISCUSSION: A future randomised controlled trial of the BD Odon Device versus the current standard instrument (the Kiwi ventouse) is planned. The findings of the ASSIST Study will inform the randomised controlled trial design. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN10203171 . Prospectively registered on 27 July 2018.