Observational studyBMC pregnancy and childbirth2022
"To get the baby out off the hook": a prospective, longitudinal, multicenter, observational study about decision making in vacuum-assisted operative vaginal delivery.
Observational study in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tools or culture? Human factors, not technology, drive cesarean section rates for suspected fetal distress.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Article
- Understanding the underuse: Barriers to vacuum-assisted birth among clinicians in Tanzania: An exploratory qualitative study.PloS one · 2026Article
- Computational modeling of vacuum-assisted delivery: biomechanics of maternal soft tissues.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2025Article
- Women's perspectives of decision-making for labour and birth: a qualitative antenatal-postnatal paired interview study.BMJ open · 2025Article
- The 300 versus 300 Study-Low Volume versus High Volume Single Balloon Catheter for Induction of Labor: A Retrospective Case-Control Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSince operative vaginal delivery may be risky for women and might cause neonatal complications, the aim of this study is to assess appropriateness of the procedure. This is a prospective, longitudinal, multicenter, observational study and it was conducted in three Italian Obstetric Units (Pisa, Massa Carrara and Prato). All term pregnant women, either nulliparous and multiparous, with singleton pregnancy and a cephalic fetus, with spontaneous or induced labour, requiring vacuum-assisted delivery were enrolled. Indications to operative vaginal delivery were grouped as alterations of fetal cardiotocography (CTG) patterns, delay/arrest of second stage of labour or elective shortening of second stage of labour. A board consisting of five among authors evaluated appropriateness of the procedure.
resultsOverall, 466 women undergoing operative vaginal deliveries were included. Cardiotocography, classified as ACOG category 2 or 3 was the indication for vacuum assisted delivery in 253 patients (54.29%). Among these, 66 women (26.1%) had an operative vaginal delivery which was then considered to be inappropriate, while in 114 cases (45.1%) CTG traces resulted to be unreadable.
conclusionDecision making process, which leads clinicians to go for operative vaginal delivery, is often influenced by shortness of time and complexity of the situation. Therefore, clinicians tend to intervene performing vacuum delivery without adopting critical analysis and without adequately considering the clinical situation. Operative vaginal delivery might be a risky procedure and should be performed only when clinically indicated and after adequate critical analysis.
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.