WITHDRAWN: Vacuum extraction versus forceps for assisted vaginal delivery

DECIDE: a cluster randomized controlled trial to reduce non-medically indicated caesareans in Burkina Faso

BACKGROUND

Since 2006, Burkina Faso has subsidized the cost of caesarean sections to increase their accessibility. Caesareans are performed by obstetricians, general practitioners, and nurses trained in emergency surgery. While the national caesarean rate is still too low (only 2 % in 2010), 12 to 24 % of caesareans performed in hospital are, in fact, not medically indicated. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and analyze the implementation of a multi-faceted intervention to lower the rate of non-medically indicated caesareans in Burkina Faso.

METHODS

This study combines a multicentre cluster randomized controlled trial with an implementation analysis in a mixed-methods approach. The evidence-based intervention will consist of three strategies to improve the competencies of maternity teams: 1) clinical audits based on objective criteria; 2) training of personnel; and 3) decision-support reminders of indications for caesareans via text messages. The unit of randomization and of intervention is the public hospital equipped with a functional operating room. Using stratified randomization on hospital type and staff qualifications, 11 hospitals have been assigned to the intervention group and 11 to the control group. The intervention will cover 1 year. Every patient who delivered by caesarean during a 6-month period in the year preceding the intervention and the 6 months following its end will be included in the trial. The change in the rate of non-medically indicated caesareans is the main criterion by which the intervention's impact will be assessed. To analyze the intervention process, a longitudinal qualitative study consisting of deliberative workshops and individual in-depth interviews will be conducted. The target outcome is a 50 % reduction in the rate of non-medically indicated caesareans.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide evidence regarding the effectiveness of a multi-faceted intervention for reducing non-medically indicated caesareans in a low-income country. By combining qualitative and quantitative methods, the study's findings will allow understanding the factors that could influence the intervention process and ultimately the intended outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The DECIDE trial is registered on the Current Controlled Trials website under the number ISRCTN48510263 on January 28, 2014.

KIELLAND'S FORCEPS: PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE

Kielland's forceps have been in obstetric practice for over 80 years but their use causes a wide spectrum of reactions in obstetricians. Those that have been well tutored in their use argue that they are a very effective instrument to achieve vaginal delivery in the malpositioned fetus, avoiding the problems of full cervical dilation caesarean section, with low complications in their hands. These exponents of the instrument argue that the “art” of obstetrics is demonstrated in the use of Kielland's forceps. However, others claim that Kielland's forceps are dangerous with high complication rates and that they should be confined to the obstetric museum. This paper reviews the history of the instrument and its inventor, to consider evidence for its effectiveness and its safety, to briefly consider other methods for delivery of the malpositioned fetus at full cervical dilation and finally to complete the journey by considering the future with particular emphasis on training the new generation of obstetricians.

Impact of increasing capacity for generating and using research on maternal and perinatal health practices in South East Asia (SEA-ORCHID Project)

BACKGROUND

Maternal and neonatal mortality and morbidity remain unacceptably high in many low and middle income countries. SEA-ORCHID was a five year international collaborative project in South East Asia which aimed to determine whether health care and health outcomes for mothers and babies could be improved by developing capacity for research generation, synthesis and use.

METHODS

Nine hospitals in Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand participated in SEA-ORCHID. These hospitals were supported by researchers from three Australian centres. Health care practices and outcomes were assessed for 1000 women at each hospital both before and after the intervention. The capacity development intervention was tailored to the needs and context of each hospital and delivered over an 18 month period. Main outcomes included adherence to forms of care likely to be beneficial and avoidance of forms of care likely to be ineffective or harmful.

RESULTS

We observed substantial variation in clinical practice change between sites. The capacity development intervention had a positive impact on some care practices across all countries, including increased family support during labour and decreased perineal shaving before birth, but in some areas there was no significant change in practice and a few beneficial practices were followed less often.

CONCLUSION

The results of SEA-ORCHID demonstrate that investing in developing capacity for research use, synthesis and generation can lead to improvements in maternal and neonatal health practice and highlight the difficulty of implementing evidence-based practice change.