Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2021 Feb 26;21(1):165.
doi: 10.1186/s12884-021-03604-z.

Perinatal outcome after vacuum assisted delivery with digital feedback on traction force; a randomised controlled study

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Perinatal outcome after vacuum assisted delivery with digital feedback on traction force; a randomised controlled study

Stefhanie Romero et al. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. .

Abstract

Background: Low and mid station vacuum assisted deliveries (VAD) are delicate manual procedures that entail a high degree of subjectivity from the operator and are associated with adverse neonatal outcome. Little has been done to improve the procedure, including the technical development, traction force and the possibility of objective documentation. We aimed to explore if a digital handle with instant haptic feedback on traction force would reduce the neonatal risk during low or mid station VAD.

Methods: A two centre, randomised superiority trial at Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden, 2016-2018. Cases were randomised bedside to either a conventional or a digital handle attached to a Bird metal cup (50 mm, 80 kPa). The digital handle measured applied force including an instant notification by vibration when high levels of traction force were predicted according to a predefined algorithm. Primary outcome was a composite of hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy, intracranial haemorrhage, seizures, death and/or subgaleal hematoma. Three hundred eighty low and mid VAD in each group were estimated to decrease primary outcome from six to 2 %.

Results: After 2 years, an interim analyse was undertaken. Meeting the inclusion criteria, 567 vacuum extractions were randomized to the use of a digital handle (n = 296) or a conventional handle (n = 271). Primary outcome did not differ between the two groups: (2.7% digital handle vs 2.6% conventional handle). The incidence of primary outcome differed significantly between the two delivery wards (4% vs 0.9%, p < 0.05). A recalculation of power revealed that 800 cases would be needed in each group to show a decrease in primary outcome from three to 1 %. This was not feasible, and the study therefore closed.

Conclusions: The incidence of primary outcome was lower than estimated and the study was underpowered. However, the difference between the two delivery wards might reflect varying degree of experience of the technical equipment. An objective documentation of the extraction procedure is an attractive alternative in respect to safety and clinical training. To demonstrate improved safety, a multicentre study is required to reach an adequate cohort. This was beyond the scope of the study.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03071783 , March 1, 2017, retrospectively registered.

Keywords: Haptic feedback; Neonatal outcome; Traction force; Vacuum assisted delivery.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

GA, MW and KY are owners of Genit Innovation, which is developing the technical device described in this work. KP and SR have no competing interests to declare. All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Vacuum Extraction Intelligent Handle – 3 with tablet computer
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
CONSORT flow diagram of eligibility, randomisation, allocation and analysis. Available at www.consort-statement.org/consort-statement/flow-diagram

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Malmstrom T. Vacuum extractor, an obstetrical instrument. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand Suppl. 1954;33(4):1–31. - PubMed
    1. The Swedish National Board of Health. Welfare T. Statistikdatabas för graviditeter, förlossningar och nyfödda. 2016.
    1. Vacca A. Reducing the risks of a vacuum delivery. Fetal Med Rev. 2006;17(4):301–315. doi: 10.1017/S0965539506001823. - DOI
    1. Ekeus C, Wrangsell K, Penttinen S, Aberg K. Neonatal complications among 596 infants delivered by vacuum extraction (in relation to characteristics of the extraction) J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2018;31(18):2402–2408. doi: 10.1080/14767058.2017.1344631. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Levin G, Elchalal U, Yagel S, Eventov-Friedman S, Ezra Y, Sompolinsky Y, et al. Risk factors associated with subgaleal hemorrhage in neonates exposed to vacuum extraction. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2019;98(11):1464–1472. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13678. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources