Management of impacted fetal head at cesarean delivery.

Globally, more than 1 in 5 women give birth by cesarean delivery, and at least 5% of these births are at full cervical dilatation. In these circumstances, and when labor has been prolonged in the first stage of labor, the fetal head can become low and wedged deep in the woman's pelvis, making it difficult to deliver the baby. This emergency is known as impacted fetal head. These are technically challenging births associated with serious risks to both the woman and the baby. The difficulty in disimpacting the fetal head increases maternal risks of hemorrhage and injury to adjacent organs and may have long-term consequences for future pregnancies. In addition, there can be associated neonatal consequences, such as skull fractures, brain hemorrhage, hypoxic brain injury, and, rarely, perinatal death. Globally, maternity staff are increasingly encountering this emergency, with studies in the United Kingdom suggesting that impacted fetal head may complicate as many as 1 in 10 emergency cesarean deliveries. Moreover, there has been a sharp increase in reports of perinatal brain injuries associated with impaction of the fetal head at cesarean delivery. When an impacted fetal head occurs, the maternity team can employ a range of approaches to help deliver the fetal head, including an assistant (another obstetrician or midwife) pushing the head up from the vagina, delivering the baby feet first (reverse breech extraction), administering tocolysis to relax the uterus, and using a balloon cephalic elevation device (Fetal Pillow) to elevate the baby's head. However, there is currently no consensus on how best to manage these births, resulting in a lack of confidence among maternity staff, variable practice, and potentially avoidable harm in some circumstances. This article examined the evidence for the prevention and management of this critical obstetrical emergency and outlined recommendations for best practices and training.

Assisted vaginal birth in 21st century: current practice and new innovations.

Assisted vaginal birth rates are falling globally with rising cesarean delivery rates. Cesarean delivery is not without consequence, particularly when carried out in the second stage of labor. Cesarean delivery in the second stage is not entirely protective against pelvic floor morbidity and can lead to serious complications in a subsequent pregnancy. It should be acknowledged that the likelihood of morbidity for mother and baby associated with cesarean delivery increases with advancing labor and is greater than spontaneous vaginal birth, irrespective of the method of operative birth in the second stage of labor. In this article, we argue that assisted vaginal birth is a skilled and safe option that should always be considered and be available as an option for women who need assistance in the second stage of labor. Selecting the most appropriate mode of birth at full dilatation requires accurate clinical assessment, supported decision-making, and personalized care with consideration for the woman's preferences. Achieving vaginal birth with the primary instrument is more likely with forceps than with vacuum extraction (risk ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.88). Midcavity forceps are associated with a greater incidence of obstetric anal sphincter injury (odds ratio, 1.83; 95% confidence interval, 1.32-2.55) but no difference in neonatal Apgar score or umbilical artery pH. The risk for adverse outcomes is minimized when the procedure is conducted by a skilled accoucheur who selects the most appropriate instrument likely to achieve vaginal birth with the primary instrument. Anticipation of potential complications and dynamic decision-making are just as important as the technique for safe instrument use. Good communication with the woman and the birthing partner is vital and there are various recommendations on how to achieve this. There have been recent developments (such as OdonAssist) in device innovation, training, and strategies for implementation at a scale that can provide opportunities for both improved outcomes and reinvigoration of an essential skill that can save mothers' and babies' lives across the world.

How to co-design a prototype of a clinical practice tool: a framework with practical guidance and a case study.

Clinical tools for use in practice-such as medicine reconciliation charts, diagnosis support tools and track-and-trigger charts-are endemic in healthcare, but relatively little attention is given to how to optimise their design. User-centred design approaches and co-design principles offer potential for improving usability and acceptability of clinical tools, but limited practical guidance is currently available. We propose a framework (FRamework for co-dESign of Clinical practice tOols or 'FRESCO') offering practical guidance based on user-centred methods and co-design principles, organised in five steps: (1) establish a multidisciplinary advisory group; (2) develop initial drafts of the prototype; (3) conduct think-aloud usability evaluations; (4) test in clinical simulations; (5) generate a final prototype informed by workshops. We applied the framework in a case study to support co-design of a prototype track-and-trigger chart for detecting and responding to possible fetal deterioration during labour. This started with establishing an advisory group of 22 members with varied expertise. Two initial draft prototypes were developed-one based on a version produced by national bodies, and the other with similar content but designed using human factors principles. Think-aloud usability evaluations of these prototypes were conducted with 15 professionals, and the findings used to inform co-design of an improved draft prototype. This was tested with 52 maternity professionals from five maternity units through clinical simulations. Analysis of these simulations and six workshops were used to co-design the final prototype to the point of readiness for large-scale testing. By codifying existing methods and principles into a single framework, FRESCO supported mobilisation of the expertise and ingenuity of diverse stakeholders to co-design a prototype track-and-trigger chart in an area of pressing service need. Subject to further evaluation, the framework has potential for application beyond the area of clinical practice in which it was applied.

Training for managing impacted fetal head at caesarean birth: multimethod evaluation of a pilot.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of national multiprofessional training for managing the obstetric emergency of impacted fetal head (IFH) at caesarean birth has potential to improve quality and safety in maternity care, but is currently lacking in the UK. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate a training package for managing IFH at caesarean birth with multiprofessional maternity teams. METHODS: The training included an evidence-based lecture supported by an animated video showing management of IFH, followed by hands-on workshops and real-time simulations with use of a birth simulation trainer, augmented reality and management algorithms. Guided by the Kirkpatrick framework, we conducted a multimethod evaluation of the training with multiprofessional maternity teams. Participants rated post-training statements about relevance and helpfulness of the training and pre-training and post-training confidence in their knowledge and skills relating to IFH (7-point Likert scales, strongly disagree to strongly agree). An ethnographer recorded sociotechnical observations during the training. Participants provided feedback in post-training focus groups. RESULTS: Participants (N=57) included 21 midwives, 25 obstetricians, 7 anaesthetists and 4 other professionals from five maternity units. Over 95% of participants agreed that the training was relevant and helpful for their clinical practice and improving outcomes following IFH. Confidence in technical and non-technical skills relating to managing IFH was variable before the training (5%-92% agreement with the pre-training statements), but improved in nearly all participants after the training (71%-100% agreement with the post-training statements). Participants and ethnographers reported that the training helped to: (i) better understand the complexity of IFH, (ii) recognise the need for multiprofessional training and management and (iii) optimise communication with those in labour and their birth partners. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluated training package can improve self-reported knowledge, skills and confidence of multiprofessional teams involved in management of IFH at caesarean birth. A larger-scale evaluation is required to validate these findings and establish how best to scale and implement the training.

Definition, management, and training in impacted fetal head at cesarean birth: a national survey of maternity professionals.

INTRODUCTION: This study assessed views, understanding and current practices of maternity professionals in relation to impacted fetal head at cesarean birth, with the aim of informing a standardized definition, clinical management approaches and training. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a survey consultation including the range of maternity professionals who attend emergency cesarean births in the UK. Thiscovery, an online research and development platform, was used to ask closed-ended and free-text questions. Simple descriptive analysis was undertaken for closed-ended responses, and content analysis for categorization and counting of free-text responses. Main outcome measures included the count and percentage of participants selecting predefined options on clinical definition, multi-professional team approach, communication, clinical management and training. RESULTS: In total, 419 professionals took part, including 144 midwives, 216 obstetricians and 59 other clinicians (eg anesthetists). We found high levels of agreement on the components of an impacted fetal head definition (79% of obstetricians) and the need for use of a multi-professional approach to management (95% of all participants). Over 70% of obstetricians deemed nine techniques acceptable for management of impacted fetal head, but some obstetricians also considered potentially unsafe practices appropriate. Access to professional training in management of impacted fetal head was highly variable, with over 80% of midwives reporting no training in vaginal disimpaction. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate agreement on the components of a standardized definition for impacted fetal head, and a need and appetite for multi-professional training. These findings can inform a program of work to improve care, including use of structured management algorithms and simulation-based multi-professional training.

Management of Impacted Fetal Head at Caesarean Birth: Scientific Impact Paper No. 73.

Over one-quarter of women in the UK have a caesarean birth (CB). More than one in 20 of these births occurs near the end of labour, when the cervix is fully dilated (second stage). In these circumstances, and when labour has been prolonged, the baby's head can become lodged deep in the maternal pelvis making it challenging to deliver the baby. During the caesarean birth, difficulty in delivery of the baby's head may result - this emergency is known as impacted fetal head (IFH). These are technically challenging births that pose significant risks to both the woman and baby. Complications for the woman include tears in the womb, serious bleeding and longer hospital stay. Babies are at increased risk of injury including damage to the head and face, lack of oxygen to the brain, nerve damage, and in rare cases, the baby may die from these complications. Maternity staff are increasingly encountering IFH at CB, and reports of associated injuries have risen dramatically in recent years. The latest UK studies suggest that IFH may complicate as many as one in 10 unplanned CBs (1.5% of all births) and that two in 100 babies affected by IFH die or are seriously injured. Moreover, there has been a sharp increase in reports of babies having brain injuries when their birth was complicated by IFH. When an IFH occurs, the maternity team can use different approaches to help deliver the baby's head at CB. These include: an assistant (another obstetrician or midwife) pushing the head up from the vagina; delivering the baby feet first; using a specially designed inflatable balloon device to elevate the baby's head and/or giving the mother a medicine to relax the womb. However, there is currently no consensus for how best to manage these births. This has resulted in a lack of confidence among maternity staff, variable practice and potentially avoidable harm in some circumstances. This paper reviews the current evidence regarding the prediction, prevention and management of IFH at CB, integrating findings from a systematic review commissioned from the National Guideline Alliance.

Validation of a novel birth simulator for impacted fetal head at cesarean section: An observational simulation study.

INTRODUCTION: Impacted fetal head (IFH) is a challenging complication of cesarean section (CS) associated with significant morbidity. Training opportunities for IFH have been reported as inconsistent and inadequate. This study assessed the validity of a novel birth simulator for IFH at cesarean section. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Obstetricians and midwives collaborated with model-making company, Limbs & Things (UK), to modify the original PROMPT Flex® simulator and develop a new "Enhanced CS Module" for IFH at cesarean section. Changes included addition of a retractable uterus and restricted pelvic inlet, and the fetal mannequin was modified to allow accurate limb articulation and flexion at the waist. Obstetricians and midwives from three maternity units in Southwest England were individually recorded, each undertaking three simulated scenarios of IFH at cesarean section. Obstetricians were asked to deliver the fetal head and midwives, to perform a vaginal push-up. Participants completed a questionnaire on realism (face validity) and usefulness for training (content validity) with five-point Likert scale responses. Construct validity was assessed by testing an a priori hypothesis that "experts" (consultant obstetricians with >7 years' experience) would be more likely to achieve delivery than "novices" (registrars with <7 years' experience). Performance variables were compared between groups using Chi-square and Mann-Whitney U-tests. RESULTS: In all, 105 simulated scenarios were undertaken by 35 obstetricians and midwives. A range of techniques were employed to deliver the IFH including change of hand, vaginal disimpaction and reverse breech extraction. Overall, 86% (30/35) described the model as fairly (4)/very realistic (5) (median = 4, interquartile range [IQR] = 4-5). The model was considered fairly (4)/very useful (5) for training by 97% (34/35; median = 5; IQR = 5-5). Experts delivered the fetal head in all simulations (36/36) and novices delivered the head in 76.9% (30/39) (p = 0.002). Experts delivered the fetal head 58% quicker than novices (median = 66.8 s, IQR = 53-86 vs median = 104 s, IQR = 67.7-137). CONCLUSIONS: This novel birth trainer realistically simulates IFH at cesarean section and allows rehearsal of all disimpaction techniques. It was reported to be very useful for training and distinguishes between novice and expert obstetricians. Techniques for IFH are difficult to learn experientially. Simulation is likely to provide an effective and safe form of training.

Impacted fetal head: A retrospective cohort study of emergency caesarean section.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate risk factors, management and outcomes of impacted fetal head (IFH) at caesarean section (CS). STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study of all women with singleton, cephalic pregnancies who had an emergency CS during one-year (2016) at North Bristol NHS Trust, UK (n = 838). The incidence of caesarean section at full dilatation (CSFD) and IFH were calculated using the annual birth rate. To identify risk factors for IFH, maternal, perinatal and intrapartum characteristics were compared according to the presence or absence of IFH, and separately for first- and second-stage CS. Techniques employed to disimpact the fetal head were described. Univariable and multivariable comparisons of maternal and perinatal outcomes were made between cases with and without an IFH. Characteristics and outcomes were compared using modified Poisson regression. RESULTS: CSFD accounted for 2.1 % of all births. IFH complicated 1.5 % of all births (11.3 % of emergency CS), with 55.8 % occurring prior to full cervical dilatation. Increased rates of IFH at CS were associated with: oxytocin augmentation (RR = 2.47 [1.61-3.80]), full cervical dilatation (RR = 4.24 [2.96-6.07], mid/low station (RR = 4.14 [2.72-6.32]), moulding (RR = 4.39 [2.55-7.54]) and caput (RR = 6.60 [3.09-14.10]). Junior operators documented IFH more than consultants (RR = 9.61 [1.35-68.2]). The strategies recorded for managing IFH included: tocolysis, reverse breech extraction and vaginal push up (33.7 %, 14.7 % and 11.6 % cases respectively) with two or more techniques used in 21.1 % cases. IFH at CS was independently associated with an increased risk of uterine extensions (RR = 3.09 [1.96-4.87]) and a composite adverse perinatal outcome (RR = 1.66 [1.21-2.28]). CONCLUSIONS: IFH is a common and heterogeneous complication associated with increased complications for both mother and baby, independent of those of CSFD. Obstetricians must remain vigilant to the possibility of IFH at all emergency CS, particularly those at full cervical dilatation or with evidence of obstructed labour. There is an urgent need for a standardised management algorithm and training in evidence-based disimpaction techniques.

Key components influencing the sustainability of a multi-professional obstetric emergencies training programme in a middle-income setting: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Multi-professional obstetric emergencies training is one promising strategy to improve maternity care. Sustaining training programmes following successful implementation remains a challenge. Understanding, and incorporating, key components within the implementation process can embed interventions within healthcare systems, thereby enhancing sustainability. This study aimed to identify key components influencing sustainability of PRactical Obstetric Multi-Professional Training (PROMPT) in the Philippines, a middle-income setting. METHODS: Three hospitals were purposively sampled to represent private, public and teaching hospital settings. Two focus groups, one comprising local trainers and one comprising training participants, were conducted in each hospital using a semi-structured topic guide. Focus groups were audio recorded. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Three researchers independently coded transcripts to ensure interpretation consistency. RESULTS: Three themes influencing sustainability were identified; attributes of local champions, multi-level organisational involvement and addressing organisational challenges. CONCLUSIONS: These themes, including potential barriers to sustainability, should be considered when designing and implementing training programmes in middle-income settings. When 'scaling-up', local clinicians should be actively involved in selecting influential implementation champions to identify challenges and strategies specific to their organisation. Network meetings could enable shared learning and sustain enthusiasm amongst local training teams. Policy makers should be engaged early, to support funding and align training with national priorities.

Impacted foetal head at caesarean section: a national survey of practice and training.

This is a national survey of UK obstetric trainees and consultant labour ward leads designed to investigate the current practice and training for an impacted foetal head (IFH) at Caesarean Section (CS). An anonymous, on-line survey was disseminated to trainees via Postgraduate Schools and RCOG trainee representatives, and to labour ward leads via their national network. Three hundred and forty-five obstetric trainees and consultants responded. The results show that IFH is variably defined and encountered by most UK obstetricians (98% had encountered IFH and 76% had experienced it before full cervical dilatation). There is significant variation in management strategies, although most respondents would use a vaginal push up to assist delivery prior to reverse breech extraction. Responses revealed a paucity of training and lack of confidence in disimpaction techniques: over one in ten respondents had not received any training for IFH and less than half had received instruction in reverse breech extraction.Impact statementWhat is already known on the subject? IFH is an increasingly recognised, technically challenging complication of intrapartum CS. A recent report suggested that birth injuries associated with IFH are now as common as with shoulder dystocia. However, there is no consensus nor guidelines regarding the best practice for management or training.What do the results of this study add? This study demonstrates that IFH is poorly defined and commonly encountered by UK obstetricians. It highlights that IFH is not restricted to CS at full dilatation and reveals the ubiquity of the vaginal push method in UK practice. We found evidence that UK obstetricians are using techniques which have not been investigated and are not recommended for managing an IFH. Moreover, this survey is an eye-opener as to the paucity of training, highlighting that UK obstetric trainees are not adequately prepared to manage this emergency.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? There is a pressing need to standardise the definition, guidance and training for IFH at CS. Further research should clarify the appropriate techniques for IFH and establish consensus for the best practice. An evidence-based simulation training package, which allows clinicians to learn and practice recognised disimpaction techniques is urgently required.

Can we improve women's experience of operative vaginal birth?

OBJECTIVE: It is well understood that advanced skills are required for operative vaginal delivery to ensure a woman's birth experience is safe, positive and to prevent adverse long term harm. We sought to identify non-technical skills determined by women to enhance experience of operative vaginal delivery by qualitative analysis of interviews conducted during the postpartum period. DESIGN: A qualitative study using semi structured interviews took place at a University teaching hospital. Sixteen women who had an operative delivery of a term baby underwent a semi structured interview at 6-8 weeks postnatal. The women were asked to reflect on good and bad experiences of their delivery and the interview was recorded verbatim. Thematic coding of data was carried out and then analysed. Women were given the option to review the transcript for respondent validation. The anonymised transcripts were independently coded by two researchers and then compared for consistency of interpretation. The themes that emerged following the final coding were used to identify a framework of behavioural and clinical skills. RESULTS: We identified several non-technical skills that were important to women's' experience of operative delivery. Professional behaviour and relationships, decision making and communication, preconceptions and preparation for operative birth, teamwork, environment and consent were themes that emerged from women's experiences which can now provide clinicians with a comprehensive behavioural framework for operative vaginal delivery. CONCLUSION: This illustration of detailed non-technical skills that has been validated by women could be used as part of clinical training and revalidation.

Nontechnical skills and decision making in operative vaginal delivery.

Nontechnical skills are defined as social, cognitive and personal resource skills that are necessary to conduct any technical skill safely. Whilst the skills are categorised into three domains: social, cognitive and personal resources, these are dependent on each other and the development and effectiveness of one relies on the other two. Effective nontechnical skills are essential in the safe care of patients in any setting, and their importance can be clearly demonstrated in the safe development of skills in many areas of medicine and surgery. Increasingly the importance of these skills is being recognised in outcomes for patients and staff, and training courses and assessment tools are being developed and used in obstetrics. Understanding of the role of nontechnical skills in labour and especially in operative vaginal births should be embedded across the specialty. Further research is needed in validation of assessment tools for these skills when used in obstetrics.

A rapid cycle method for local adaptation of an obstetric emergencies training program.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the adaptation of an obstetric emergencies training program to align with local clinical practice. METHODS: A feasibility study was conducted to investigate the potential implementation of the PRactical Obstetric Multi-Professional Training (PROMPT) program at eight urban tertiary hospitals in the Philippines. Multi-professional teams attended a 2-day course on September 23 and 24, 2015, that comprised a demonstration PROMPT course (day 1) and a Train-the-Trainers session (day 2). During a facilitated adaptation session, each team reviewed the PROMPT algorithms for eclampsia, severe pre-eclampsia, postpartum hemorrhage and sepsis. The teams marked steps concordant with local practice and identified differences with local practice. Suggested amendments were reviewed by the PROMPT project team, using clinical guidelines to support any adaptations. RESULTS: The PROMPT algorithm for initial management of eclampsia was used as an exemplar. Five of the nine management steps were concordant with local practice: support; airway; breathing; circulation; and control seizures. Amendments were successfully implemented for the following steps: call for help; magnesium sulfate loading dose; and magnesium sulfate maintenance dose. CONCLUSION: Rapid and efficient adaptation of PROMPT training materials for use in the Philippines was possible using a facilitated and focused approach, utilizing the expertise of a representative mix of local healthcare professionals and evidence-based guidelines.

Unsatisfactory colposcopy: clinical decision-making in conditions of uncertainty.

BACKGROUND: Unsatisfactory colposcopy, where the cells of interest are not visible in women with a positive cervical screening test, is a common area of clinical uncertainty due to the lack of clear evidence and guidance. Colposcopists' opinions and experiences are likely to have a significant influence on service provision and the development of national policy. The aim of this study was to analyse decision-making when applied to women with unsatisfactory colposcopy. METHODS: A multi-centre qualitative study utilizing a series of focus groups in an English healthcare region. Sampling aimed to ensure heterogeneity of experience and healthcare provider demographics. A topic guide covered a range of clinical and cytological variables and was compiled by the researchers and three expert Colposcopists. Using an iterative approach, thematic analysis was selected as the most appropriate method to identify factors affecting decision-making. RESULTS: Twenty-three Colposcopists from four units participated. The decision to treat was easier in women with high-grade cytology and high risk women with low-grade cytology such as heavy smokers, poor attenders, older women, those who had completed their families and women opting for treatment. Where decision-making was more complex, intuition and a multi-disciplinary approach were used to guide management. Areas of dissonance, which are affected by paucity of evidence and emotive factors, included cytological collection device, clinical setting and length of conservative follow-up and depth of excision in women at high risk of treatment-related morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: Anxiety of missing a cancer deters long-term cytological follow-up, resulting in heterogeneity of care and higher than anticipated excisional treatments in women with low-grade screening and unsatisfactory colposcopy. In areas of clinical uncertainty when decisions are dominated by affect, clinical guidance can reduce the difficulty and anxiety of decision-making.

Decision-making in operative vaginal delivery: when to intervene, where to deliver and which instrument to use? Qualitative analysis of expert clinical practice.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the decision-making process involved in determining when to intervene, where to deliver and the optimal choice of instrument for operative vaginal deliveries in the second stage of labour. STUDY DESIGN: A qualitative study using interviews and video recordings took place at two university teaching hospitals (St. Michael's Hospital Bristol and Ninewells Hospital, Dundee). Ten obstetricians and eight midwives were identified as experts in conducting or supporting operative vaginal deliveries. Semi-structured interviews were carried out using routine clinical scenarios. The experts were also video recorded conducting low cavity vacuum and mid-cavity rotational forceps deliveries in a simulation setting. The interviews and video recordings were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic coding. The anonymised data were independently coded by three researchers and then compared for consistency of interpretation. The experts reviewed the coded interview and video data for respondent validation and clarification. The themes that emerged following the final coding were used to identify the decision-making process when planning and conducting an operative vaginal delivery. Key decision points were reported in selecting when and where to conduct an operative vaginal delivery and which instrument to use. RESULTS: The final decision-making list highlights the various decision points to consider when performing an operative vaginal delivery. We identified clinical factors that experts take into consideration when selecting where the delivery should take place and the preferred choice of instrument. CONCLUSION: This detailed illustration of the decision-making process could aid trainees' understanding of the approach to safe operative vaginal delivery, aiming to minimise morbidity.

Qualitative analysis by interviews and video recordings to establish the components of a skilled rotational forceps delivery.

OBJECTIVE: To define the skills of a mid-cavity rotational forceps delivery to facilitate transfer of skills from expert obstetricians to trainee obstetricians. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative interviews and video analysis carried out at maternity units of two university teaching hospitals (St. Michael's Hospital, Bristol, and Ninewells Hospital, Dundee). Ten obstetricians were identified as experts in conducting operative vaginal deliveries. Semi-structured interviews were carried out to identify key technical skills. The experts were also video recorded conducting mid-cavity rotational deliveries in a simulation setting. The interviews and video recordings were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic coding. The anonymised data were individually coded by the three researchers and then compared for consistency of interpretation. The experts reviewed the data for respondent validation. The themes that emerged following the coding were used to formulate a taxonomy of skills. RESULTS: Rotational forceps were preferred by eight experts and two experts preferred manual rotation followed by direct traction forceps. The final taxonomy included detailed technical skills for Kielland rotational forceps delivery and manual rotation followed by direct traction forceps delivery. CONCLUSION: This explicitly defined skills taxonomy could aid trainees' understanding of the technique of rotational forceps delivery. This is an important potential contributor to safely reducing the rate of second-stage caesarean section.

A cohort study of maternal and neonatal morbidity in relation to use of sequential instruments at operative vaginal delivery.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk factors and maternal and neonatal morbidity associated with sequential use of instruments (vacuum and forceps) at operative vaginal delivery. STUDY DESIGN: A cohort study of 1360 nulliparous women delivered by a single instrument (vacuum or forceps) or by both instruments, within two university teaching hospitals in Scotland and England. Outcomes were compared for use of sequential instruments versus use of any single instrument. A sub-group analysis compared sequential instruments versus forceps alone. Outcomes of interest included anal sphincter tears, postpartum haemorrhage, urinary retention, urinary incontinence, prolonged hospital admission, neonatal trauma, low Apgar scores, abnormal cord bloods and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). RESULTS: Use of sequential instruments at operative vaginal delivery was associated with fetal malpositions, Odds Ratio (OR) 1.8 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.3-2.6), and large neonatal head circumference (>37 cm) (OR 5.0, 95% CI 2.6-9.7) but not with maternal obesity or grade of operator. Sequential use of instruments was associated with greater maternal and neonatal morbidity than single instrument use (anal sphincter tear 17.4% versus 8.4%, adjusted OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.2-3.3; umbilical artery pH <7.10, 13.8% versus 5.0%, adjusted OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.7-6.2). Sequential instrument use had greater morbidity than single instrument use with forceps alone (anal sphincter tear OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.1-2.9; umbilical artery pH <7.10 OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.7-5.5). CONCLUSIONS: The use of sequential instruments significantly increases maternal and neonatal morbidity. Obstetricians need training in the appropriate selection and use of instruments with the aim of completing delivery safely with one instrument.

Non-technical skills for obstetricians conducting forceps and vacuum deliveries: qualitative analysis by interviews and video recordings.

OBJECTIVE: Non-technical skills are cognitive and social skills required in an operational task. These skills have been identified and taught in the surgical domain but are of particular relevance to obstetrics where the patient is awake, the partner is present and the clinical circumstances are acute and often stressful. The aim of this study was to define the non-technical skills of an operative vaginal delivery (forceps or vacuum) to facilitate transfer of skills from expert obstetricians to trainee obstetricians. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative study using interviews and video recordings. The study was conducted at two university teaching hospitals (St. Michael's Hospital, Bristol and Ninewells Hospital, Dundee). Participants included 10 obstetricians and eight midwives identified as experts in conducting or supporting operative vaginal deliveries. Semi-structured interviews were carried out using routine clinical scenarios. The experts were also video recorded conducting forceps and vacuum deliveries in a simulation setting. The interviews and video recordings were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic coding. The anonymised data were independently coded by the three researchers and then compared for consistency of interpretation. The experts reviewed the coded data for respondent validation and clarification. The themes that emerged were used to identify the non-technical skills required for conducting an operative vaginal delivery. RESULTS: The final skills list was classified into seven main categories. Four categories (situational awareness, decision making, task management, and team work and communication) were similar to the categories identified in surgery. Three further categories unique to obstetrics were also identified (professional relationship with the woman, maintaining professional behaviour and cross-monitoring of performance). CONCLUSION: This explicitly defined skills taxonomy could aid trainees' understanding of the non-technical skills to be considered when conducting an operative vaginal delivery and potentially reduce morbidity and improve the experience of delivery for the mother.