Which factors play a role in clinical decision-making in external cephalic version?
- PMID: 17957499
- DOI: 10.1080/00016340701728075
Which factors play a role in clinical decision-making in external cephalic version?
Abstract
Objective: To assess the clinical factors that influence the estimates of clinicians of the success of an external cephalic version(ECV), and the subsequent management decisions made by clinicians.
Design: We constructed 16 fictional vignettes of women with a term fetus in breech position eligible for ECV. Setting. Secondary and tertiary clinics in The Netherlands.
Population: Thirty-seven gynaecologists, residents and midwifes.
Methods: Sixteen case summaries concerning a hypothetical patient eligible for ECV. Potential prognostic factors that varied between the cases were parity, maternal body mass index, engagement of the fetus, amniotic fluid, fetal growth, fetal presentation and placental localisation. For each case presentation, the clinicians were asked for their inclination to perform an ECV, and whether or not they would use tocolysis.
Results: The estimated probabilities of success varied between 20 and 60%. The number of clinicians that would attempt an ECV varied per case between 32 and 97%. Amniotic fluid and engagement contributed 80% of the variation in the decision to perform ECV. In the case of oligohydramnios or an engaged breech, the clinicians tended not to perform an ECV.
Conclusion: Amniotic fluid and engagement seem to be the main factors in the clinical decision-making of clinicians in ECV.This decision-making is probably experience based. Systematic knowledge of clinical prognosticators and subsequent assessment of their prognostic capacity is needed.
Similar articles
-
Prognostic parameters for successful external cephalic version.J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2008 Sep;21(9):660-2. doi: 10.1080/14767050802244938. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2008. PMID: 18828059
-
Prediction of success of external cephalic version after 36 weeks.Am J Perinatol. 2011 Feb;28(2):103-10. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1262909. Epub 2010 Jul 26. Am J Perinatol. 2011. PMID: 20661845
-
A retrospective study of the success, safety and effectiveness of external cephalic version without tocolysis in a specialised midwifery centre in the Netherlands.Midwifery. 2008 Mar;24(1):38-45. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2006.07.009. Epub 2006 Dec 29. Midwifery. 2008. PMID: 17196716
-
External cephalic version for singleton breech presentation: proposal of a practical check-list for obstetricians.Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2015 Jul;19(13):2340-53. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2015. PMID: 26214768 Review.
-
Ultrasound factors to predict the outcome of external cephalic version: a meta-analysis.Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Jan;33(1):76-84. doi: 10.1002/uog.6277. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2009. PMID: 19115237 Review.
Cited by
-
Strategies to reduce cesarean deliveries: surveying Polish midwives and midwifery students on external cephalic version practices.BMC Nurs. 2025 May 22;24(1):582. doi: 10.1186/s12912-025-03220-8. BMC Nurs. 2025. PMID: 40405180 Free PMC article.
-
Assessment of the Successful External Cephalic Version Prognostic Parameters Effect on Final Mode of Delivery.Cureus. 2021 Jul 26;13(7):e16637. doi: 10.7759/cureus.16637. eCollection 2021 Jul. Cureus. 2021. PMID: 34458042 Free PMC article.
-
Cost-effectiveness of external cephalic version for term breech presentation.BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2010 Jan 21;10:3. doi: 10.1186/1471-2393-10-3. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2010. PMID: 20092630 Free PMC article.
-
Helping pregnant women make better decisions: a systematic review of the benefits of patient decision aids in obstetrics.BMJ Open. 2011 Dec 21;1(2):e000261. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000261. Print 2011. BMJ Open. 2011. PMID: 22189349 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources