OptiBreech collaborative care versus standard care for women with a breech-presenting fetus at term: A pilot parallel group randomised trial to evaluate the feasibility of a randomised trial nested within a cohort.

OptiBreech collaborative care is a multi-disciplinary care pathway for breech presentation at term, with continuity from a breech specialist midwife, including where chosen, for vaginal breech birth (VBB). Pilot randomised trial using unblinded 1:1 parallel group allocation to OptiBreech versus standard care, within a cohort. Participants were women with a breech-presenting fetus > 33 weeks, at four sites in England, January-June 2022. A two-stage consent process was used. Participants consented to undergo random selection to be offered a 'new care process', with a choice to accept it, or not. Primary objectives were to identify recruitment, acceptance, and attrition rates. Randomisation procedures and potential primary outcomes for a substantive study were also feasibility-tested. 68 women were randomised between January-June 2022. The consent process was acceptable to participants, but randomisation was unacceptable to women who specifically sought OptiBreech care. Two women withdrew due to concerns about sharing personal information. More women planned a VBB when randomised to OptiBreech Care (23.5% vs 0, p = .002, 95% CI = 9.3%,37.8%). Women randomised to OptiBreech care had: lower rates of cephalic presentation at birth (38.2% vs 54.5%), higher rates of vaginal birth (32.4% vs 24.2%), lower rates of in-labour caesarean birth (20.6% vs 36.4%), lower rates of neonatal intensive care (5.9% vs 9.1%), and lower rates of severe neonatal morbidity (2.9% vs 9.1%). Randomisation was stopped on the advice of the steering committee before the planned sample of 104, as lack of access to VBB within standard care prohibited comparison of outcomes. Demand for VBB is sufficient for a cohort study, but comparison of outcomes by 1:1 randomisation is not feasible. OptiBreech care would be best evaluated using stepped wedge cluster randomisation. Funded by the United Kingdom National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR300582). Clinical trial registration: ISRCTN 14521381.

Not too fast, not too slow: A review of historical trends in vaginal breech time management.

PROBLEM: A lack of consistent professional guidance on when to intervene during emergence (buttocks and anus visible at the introitus to birth of the head) in vaginal breech birth (VBB). BACKGROUND: Hypoxia and asphyxia are common complications of VBB, especially due to umbilical cord compression around the time of emergence. AIM: To gain insight into VBB time management trends, the evidence behind these practices and how they may have influenced outcomes. METHODS: Literature review of obstetric textbooks published between 1960 and 2000 contained in the Wellcome Collection and Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Library in London. FINDINGS: 90 textbooks were reviewed. Recommendations for 'safe' intervals between birth of the umbilicus and the head ranged from 5 to 20 min. Many sources focused only on the time required to deliver the head, with 'up to 10 min' being the most common interval described. The review found no mention of cord compression causing concern earlier in breech births than once the umbilicus itself is delivered, nor any evidence to support the recommendations. DISCUSSION: These findings demonstrate a long-term pattern across the second half of the 20th century, whereby birth attendants were urged not to rush emergence nor delay intervention but were given little clear guidance on optimal timings. CONCLUSION: Clear, evidence-based guidance should be provided in breech training materials to avoid unnecessary hypoxic injuries, and this guidance should be rigorously evaluated.