Article

Persistent fetal occiput posterior position: obstetric outcomes.

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Obstetrics and Gynecology (Impact Factor: 4.37). 05/2003; 101(5 Pt 1):915-20. DOI: 10.1016/S0029-7844(03)00068-1
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To evaluate the obstetric outcomes associated with persistent occiput posterior position of the fetal head in term laboring patients.
We performed a cohort study of 6434 consecutive, term, vertex, laboring nulliparous and multiparous patients, comparing those who delivered infants in the occiput posterior position with those who delivered in the occiput anterior position. We examined maternal demographics, labor and delivery characteristics, and maternal and neonatal outcomes.
The prevalence of persistent occiput posterior position at delivery was 5.5% overall, 7.2% in nulliparas, and 4.0% in multiparas (P <.001). Persistent occiput posterior position was associated with shorter maternal stature and prior cesarean delivery. During labor and delivery, the occiput posterior position was associated with prolonged first and second stages of labor, oxytocin augmentation, use of epidural analgesia, chorioamnionitis, assisted vaginal delivery, third and fourth degree perineal lacerations, cesarean delivery, excessive blood loss, and postpartum infection. Newborns had lower 1-minute Apgar scores, but showed no differences in 5-minute Apgar scores, gestational age, or birth weight.
Persistent occiput posterior position is associated with a higher rate of complications during labor and delivery. In our population, the chances that a laboring woman with persistent occiput posterior position will have a spontaneous vaginal delivery are only 26% for nulliparas and 57% for multiparas.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
342 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The management of the occiput posterior (OP) position has been controversial for many years. Manual rotation can be performed by midwives and could reduce cesarean sections and instrumental births. We aimed to determine current midwifery views, knowledge, and practice of manual rotation. A de-identified, self-reported questionnaire was e-mailed to all Australian College of Midwives full members (n = 3,997). Of 3,182 surveyed, 57 percent (1,817) responded, of whom 51 percent (920) were currently practicing midwifery. Seventy-seven percent of midwives thought that manual rotation at full dilatation was a valid intervention. Sixty-four percent stated the procedure was acceptable before instrumental delivery, but 30 percent were unsure. Most practicing midwives (93%) had heard of manual rotation, but only 18 percent had performed one in the last year. Midwives would support the routine performance of manual rotation for OP position if it reduced operative births from 68 to 50 percent and would support manual rotation for occiput transverse (OT) position if it reduced operative births from 39 to 25 percent. This study indicates that manual rotation is considered acceptable by most midwives in Australia, yet is only performed by a minority. Midwives would be willing to perform prophylactic manual rotation if it was known to facilitate normal vaginal births suggesting a scope to introduce this procedure into widespread clinical practice.
    Birth 03/2014; 41(1):64-9. · 2.93 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective To determine whether the use of ultrasound can reduce the incidence of incorrect diagnosis of the fetal head position at instrumental delivery and subsequent morbidity.DesignTwo-arm, parallel, randomised trial, conducted from June 2011 to December 2012.SettingTwo maternity hospitals in the Republic of Ireland.SampleA cohort of 514 nulliparous women at term (≥37 weeks of gestation) with singleton cephalic pregnancies, aiming to deliver vaginally, were recruited prior to an induction of labour or in early labour.Methods If instrumental delivery was required, women who had provided written consent were randomised to receive clinical assessment (standard care) or ultrasound scan and ultrasound assessment (ultrasound).Main outcome measureIncorrect diagnosis of the fetal head position.ResultsThe incidence of incorrect diagnosis was significantly lower in the ultrasound group than the standard care group (4/257, 1.6%, versus 52/257, 20.2%; odds ratio 0.06; 95% confidence interval 0.02–0.19; P < 0.001). The decision to delivery interval was similar in both groups (ultrasound mean 13.8 minutes, SD 8.7 minutes, versus standard care mean 14.6 minutes, SD 10.1 minutes, P = 0.35). The incidence of maternal and neonatal complications, failed instrumental delivery, and caesarean section was not significantly different between the two groups.Conclusions An ultrasound assessment prior to instrumental delivery reduced the incidence of incorrect diagnosis of the fetal head position without delaying delivery, but did not prevent morbidity. A more integrated clinical skills-based approach is likely to be required to prevent adverse outcomes at instrumental delivery.
    BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 04/2014; · 3.76 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To determine the feasibility of a multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) to investigate whether digital rotation of the fetal head from occiput posterior (OP) position in the second stage of labour reduces the risk of operative delivery (defined as caesarean section (CS) or instrumental delivery). We conducted the study between December 2010 and December 2011 in a tertiary referral hospital in Australia. A transabdominal ultrasound was performed early in the second stage of labour on women with cephalic, singleton pregnancies to determine the fetal position. Those women with a fetus in the OP position were randomised to either a digital rotation or a sham procedure. In all other ways, participants received their usual intrapartum care. Data regarding demographics, mode of delivery, labour, post natal period and neonatal outcomes were collected. One thousand and four women were consented, 834 achieved full dilatation, and 30 were randomised. An additional portable ultrasound scan and a blinded 'sham' digital rotation were acceptable to women and staff. Operative delivery rates were 13/15 in the digital rotation (four CS and nine instrumental) and 12/15 in the sham (three CS and nine instrumental) groups, respectively. A large double-blinded multicentre RCT would be feasible and acceptable to women and staff. Strategies to improve recruitment such as consenting women with an effective epidural in active labour should be considered. This would be the first RCT to answer a clinically important question which could significantly affect the operative delivery rate in Australia and internationally.
    Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 03/2014; · 1.30 Impact Factor