SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2006
Intrapartum interventions for preventing shoulder dystocia.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Different intensities of glycaemic control for women with gestational diabetes mellitus.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Different intensities of glycaemic control for women with gestational diabetes mellitus.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Shoulder Dystocia: A Comprehensive Literature Review on Diagnosis, Prevention, Complications, Prognosis, and Management.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- Obstetric Paralysis: Who is to blame? A systematic literature review.Revista brasileira de ortopedia · 2020Article
- Changing Labor and Delivery Practice: Focus on Achieving Practice and Documentation Standardization with the Goal of Improving Neonatal Outcomes.Health services research · 2016Article
- Six-year incidence and some features of cases of brachial plexus injury in a tertiary referral center.Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2015Article
- Assessment of bony pelvis and vaginally assisted deliveries.ISRN obstetrics and gynecology · 2013Article
- Abdominal Access for Shoulder Dystocia as a Last Resort - a Case Report.Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde · 2012Article
- A comparison of obstetric maneuvers for the acute management of shoulder dystocia.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2011Article
- Shoulder dystocia: an Evidence-Based approach.Journal of prenatal medicine · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe early management of shoulder dystocia involves the administration of various manoeuvres which aim to relieve the dystocia by manipulating the fetal shoulders and increasing the functional size of the maternal pelvis.
objectivesTo assess the effects of prophylactic manoeuvres in preventing shoulder dystocia. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (1 June 2006). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing the prophylactic implementation of manoeuvres and maternal positioning with routine or standard care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently applied exclusion criteria, assessed trial quality and extracted data. MAIN
resultsTwo trials were included; one comparing the McRobert's manoeuvre and suprapubic pressure with no prophylactic manoeuvres in 185 women likely to give birth to a large baby and one trial comparing the use of the McRobert's manoeuvre versus lithotomy positioning in 40 women. We decided not to pool the results of the two trials. One study reported fifteen cases of shoulder dystocia in the therapeutic (control) group compared to five in the prophylactic group (relative risk (RR) 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 1.14) and the other study reported one episode of shoulder dystocia in both prophylactic and lithotomy groups. In the first study, there were significantly more caesarean sections in the prophylactic group and when these were included in the results, significantly fewer instances of shoulder dystocia were seen in the prophylactic group (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.86). In this study, thirteen women in the control group required therapeutic manoeuvres after delivery of the fetal head compared to three in the treatment group (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.02). One study reported no birth injuries or low Apgar scores recorded. In the other study, one infant in the control group had a brachial plexus injury (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.02 to 10.61), and one infant had a five-minute Apgar score less than seven (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.02 to 10.61). AUTHORS'
conclusionsThere are no clear findings to support or refute the use of prophylactic manoeuvres to prevent shoulder dystocia, although one study showed an increased rate of caesareans in the prophylactic group. Both included studies failed to address important maternal outcomes such as maternal injury, psychological outcomes and satisfaction with birth. Due to the low incidence of shoulder dystocia, trials with larger sample sizes investigating the use of such manoeuvres are required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.