SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2008
Trial of instrumental delivery in theatre versus immediate caesarean section for anticipated difficult assisted births.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reducing stillbirths: interventions during labour.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2009Pooled it
- Study protocol. IDUS - Instrumental delivery & ultrasound: a multi-centre randomised controlled trial of ultrasound assessment of the fetal head position versus standard care as an approach to prevent morbidity at instrumental delivery.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2012Trial
- Maternal morbidity following a trial of labor after cesarean birth: A scoping review of operative vaginal birth compared with cesarean birth in the second stage of labor.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Article
- Global report on preterm birth and stillbirth (3 of 7): evidence for effectiveness of interventions.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2010Review
- Evaluation of pelvic floor symptoms and sexual function in primiparous women who underwent operative vaginal delivery versus cesarean delivery for second-stage arrest.Female pelvic medicine & reconstructive surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe majority of women have spontaneous vaginal births, but some women need assistance in the second stage with delivery of the baby, using either the obstetric forceps or vacuum extraction. Rates of instrumental vaginal delivery range from 5% to 20% of all births in industrialised countries. The majority of instrumental vaginal deliveries are conducted in the delivery room, but in a small proportion (2% to 5%), a trial of instrumental vaginal delivery is conducted in theatre with preparations made for proceeding to caesarean section.
objectivesTo determine differences in maternal and neonatal morbidity between women who, due to anticipated difficulty, have trial of instrumental vaginal delivery in theatre and those who have immediate caesarean section for failure to progress in the second stage. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (May 2008). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing trial of instrumental vaginal delivery (vacuum extraction or forceps) in operating theatre to immediate caesarean section for women with failure to progress in the second stage (active second stage more than 60 minutes in primigravidae). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We identified no studies meeting our inclusion criteria. MAIN
resultsNo studies were included. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThere is no current evidence from randomised trials to influence practice.
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.