| Literature DB >> 33167939 |
Perrine Coste Mazeau1, Nedjma Boukeffa2, Nathalie Ticaud Boileau2, Samantha Huet2, Maud Traverse2, Jean-Luc Eyraud2, Alexine Laguerre2, Cyrille Catalan2, Cécilia Riedl3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Instrumental deliveries are an unavoidable part of obstetric practice. Dedicated training is needed for each instrument. To identify when a trainee resident can be entrusted with instrumental deliveries by Suzor forceps by studying obstetric anal sphincter injuries.Entities:
Keywords: Instrumental delivery; Obstetric anal sphincter injuries; Residents; Suzor forceps
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33167939 PMCID: PMC7653800 DOI: 10.1186/s12884-020-03358-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ISSN: 1471-2393 Impact factor: 3.007
Fig. 1Deliveries at Limoges Mother and Child Hospital from November 1st 2008 to November 1st 2016
Fig. 2Mean values and standard deviations of forceps delivery according to the experience of the resident
Time (in days) before first forceps delivery in the Limoges Mother and Child Hospital
| Mean value | Median | Standard deviation | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Older residents | 49 | 39.5 | 44.5 |
| Younger residents | 116 | 89 | 95 |
| 84 | 65 | 81 |
Characteristics of patients and newborns
| Variables | ||
|---|---|---|
| Age. | 29.2 | (± 5.3) |
| BMI. | 22.3 | (± 4.5) |
| Primiparity. | 995 | (79.4%) |
| Scarred uterus. | 136 | (10.8%) |
| Analgesia. | 1243 | (99.2%) |
| Indication of instrumental delivery: | ||
| Abnormal fetal heart. | 758 | (60.5%) |
| Arrest of fetal descent. | 489 | (39.0%) |
| Contraindications to expulsive efforts. | 6 | (5.8%) |
| Induced labor. | 350 | (27.9%) |
| Progression of the fetus at the time of the first instrument used: | ||
| Pelvic inlet. | 158 | (12.6%) |
| Midpelvis. | 1022 | (81.6%) |
| Pelvic outlet. | 73 | (0.06%) |
| Operative delivery in the occipito-sacral position. | 84 | (6.7%) |
| Intact perineum. | 10 | (0.8%) |
| Perineal tears: | ||
| 1st degree. | 80 | (6.4%) |
| 2nd degree. | 82 | (6.5%) |
| 3rd degree. | 70 | (5.6%) |
| 4th degree. | 12 | (1.0%) |
| Episiotomy. | 1128 | (90.0%) |
| Episiotomy without any other associated lesion. | 999 | (79.7%) |
| Blood loss over 500 mL. | 74 | (6.3%) |
| Newborn’s weight in grams. | 3277 | (± 439) |
| Newborn’s weight ≥ 4000 g. | 54 | (4.3%) |
| Cranial perimeter (cm). | 35 | (± 1.2) |
| Gestational age at delivery in weeks of gestation. | 40 | (± 1.4) |
| Premature births before 37 weeks of gestation. | 53 | (4.2%) |
Identification of risk factors for obstetric anal sphincter injuries (3rd or 4th degree perineal tear)
| Resident who performed fewer than 24 forceps deliveries | |
| Resident who completed fewer than 2.36 semesters of experience practicing instrumental deliveries | |
| Protective effect of episiotomy | |
| Posterior presentation | |
| Progression of the fetus during the fitting of the first instrument | 0.196 |
| Induced labor | 0.98 |
| Indication of the operative delivery | 0.12 |
| Protective effect of obesity (BMI ≥ 30) | |
| Scarred uterus | 0.97 |
| Primiparity | 0.18 |
| Cranial perimeter < 330 mm | |
| Fetal macrosomia (≥ 4000 g) | 0.10 |
| Post-term delivery (≥ 41 weeks of gestation) | 0.17 |
Fig. 3Evolution of the rate of obstetric anal sphincter injuries according to the experience of the resident