Five years to the Term Breech Trial: the rise and fall of a randomized controlled trial.

American journal of obstetrics and gynecology (Impact Factor: 4.7). 01/2007; 195(6):e22; author reply e23. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2006.02.018
Source: PubMed
7 Reads
  • Source
    • "As such it is important to consider if immediate and longer-term outcomes and reporting in response to queries raised should have been assessed prior to publication, and if the trial outcomes were the most appropriate for all relevant stakeholders. Practice changed globally based on publication of immediate outcomes, despite criticisms that study results may have been subject to bias due to problems with the trial protocol (Glezerman 2006); however, the longer-term (2 year) outcomes showed no difference (Whyte et al. 2004) which may have been a more reassuring fi nding for clinicians and for women, posing the issue of which outcomes at which time point should be used to inform practice? In terms of how women were reassured, we would also have to consider the basis for outcomes on which obstetricians defi ned their expertise in supporting vaginal breech birth and whether outcomes would have differed if midwives had also been involved. "

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Eine Beckenendlage (BEL) ist eine Längslage und daher eine geburtsmögliche Lage. Die Besonderheit gründet sich lediglich auf die verschiedenartige Poleinstellung, bei der entweder der Steiß oder Steiß und Füße gemeinsam den vorangehenden Kindsteil ausmachen. Demzufolge ist die BEL keine Anomalie, sondern eine physiologische Normvariation der Längslage. Auch wenn eine vaginale Beckenendlagengeburt einen physiologischen Vorgang darstellt, sollten die Besonderheiten und möglichen Komplikationen im Gegensatz zur Schädellage bekannt sein. Dies bezieht sich insbesondere auf die Unterschiede in der Geburtsleitung einer vaginalen Geburt.
Show more

Similar Publications