Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42485079›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2026

Manual Versus Instrumental Rotation of the Fetal Head in Malposition at Birth (ROTATE Study): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Dawn Parris, Raffaele Napolitano, Jonathan Bishop, Annette Briley, Laura Butler, Versha Cheed, Anna L David, Zaina Habib, Pollyanna Hardy, Kim Hinshaw and 13 more

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

23 authors.

Dawn ParrisMaternal Fetal Medicine, Elizabeth Garrett Anderson (EGA) Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4702-0861
Raffaele NapolitanoMaternal Fetal Medicine, Elizabeth Garrett Anderson (EGA) Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9434-7678
Jonathan BishopBirmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1789-5886
Annette BrileyCaring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4266-920X
Laura ButlerBirmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8858-1302
Versha CheedDepartment of Applied Health Sciences, Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6713-0913
Anna L DavidEGA Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0199-6140
Zaina HabibBirmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-1479-3644
Pollyanna HardyNuffield Department of Population Health, National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit Clinical Trials Unit (NPEU CTU), University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2937-8368
Kim HinshawObstetrics and Gynaecology, Sunderland Royal Hospital, Sunderland, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0468-4326
Laura L JonesDepartment of Applied Health Sciences, School of Health Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4018-3855
Rachel LillywhiteBirmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4953-7357
Eleanor MolloyDepartment of Applied Health Sciences, School of Health Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4380-1006
Jacqueline NichollsEGA Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5482-7973
Stephen O'BrienObstetrics and Gynaecology, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3133-8920
Rachel PlachcinskiNational Childbirth Trust, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9908-0773
Andrew ShennanWomen and Children's Health, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5273-3132
Nigel SimpsonSchool of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0758-7583
Maureen TreadwellBirth Trauma Association, Derbyshire, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7531-7553
Bassel WattarClinical Trials Unit, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8287-9271
Andrew WeeksWomen's and Children's Health, Institute of Life Course & Medical Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1909-337X
ROTATE Study GroupDepartment of Applied Health Sciences, Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
Dimitrios SiassakosEGA Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1078-9856

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundApproximately 5% of women will be affected by fetal malposition at full cervical dilatation, with the occiput in transverse or posterior positions. These women are more likely to require assistance to give birth to their babies with either rotational vaginal birth or cesarean birth at full dilatation. Three different rotational methods can be used: rotational (Kielland) forceps, rotational vacuum, and manual rotation. Current evidence supporting the use of the 3 rotational methods is only from observational data. To date, no randomized controlled trial (RCT) of rotational methods has been completed.

objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate whether manual rotation of the fetal head in persistent malposition at full cervical dilatation reduces the risk of severe maternal perineal trauma without substantially increasing the risk of cesarean birth, compared with instrumental rotation.

methodsROTATE is a pragmatic, multicenter, 2-arm parallel group, open-label RCT of manual versus instrumental rotation of the fetal head in malposition at birth with an internal pilot and an embedded qualitative process evaluation. The primary outcome is to evaluate whether manual versus instrumental rotation at full cervical dilatation reduces the risk of severe perineal trauma (superiority outcome), defined as a third- or fourth-degree tear, without substantially increasing the risk of cesarean birth at full dilatation (noninferiority coprimary outcome). A sample size calculation found that 4988 participants are required to detect a clinically meaningful reduction of third- or fourth-degree tears from 6% to 4% with 90% power (α=.05). A total sample size of 5200 participants from approximately 40 sites is anticipated, as loss to follow-up is expected to be about 4%. Neonatal trauma, a composite of potential outcomes relating to intrapartum hypoxia and physical trauma, is a safety signal. The setting is National Health Service consultant-led maternity units across the United Kingdom. Randomization is performed after eligibility has been confirmed and verbal consent has been obtained. Randomization is undertaken via a 24-hour telephone service or web-based system. Participants are randomized at an individual level on a 1:1 ratio to manual or instrumental (forceps or vacuum) rotation. Written consent is sought postnatally.

resultsData collection took place between September 9, 2022, and November 5, 2024. The total number of recruits is 321. The data analysis of primary and secondary outcomes is ongoing at the time of submission.

conclusionsA multicenter RCT of rotational methods has been conducted in the United Kingdom. Although the trial was closed early due to challenges in meeting recruitment targets, the results are still highly anticipated.

trial registrationISRCTN ISRCTN10193017; https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN10193017. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/72505.

Indexed as

Extraction, ObstetricalLabor PresentationVersion, FetalEquivalence Trials as TopicFemaleHeadHumansMulticenter Studies as TopicPerineumPregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRotationcesarean birth at full dilatationfetal malpositionKielland forcepsmanual rotationobstetric anal sphincter injuryobstetric forcepsqualitative process evaluationrandomized controlled trialrotational vaginal birthvacuum extraction

Identifiers

PMID42485079
PMCPMC13444028

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.