Determinants of pain perception after external cephalic version in pregnant women

A randomised controlled trial to assess the feasibility of utilising virtual reality to facilitate analgesia during external cephalic version

External cephalic version (ECV) is associated with a moderate degree of pain. Virtual reality (VR) is a technology that has shown promise in offering procedural analgesia. We undertook a clinical pilot to assess the viability of VR to reduce pain during ECV. In an open randomised controlled trial (RCT), we randomised 50 women to either VR or standard care each (25 per group). Women receiving VR were administered VR content (Skylights) via a headset. Pre- and post-procedural measures of pain, anxiety, device experience and vital signs were measured. There were no significant differences between groups (VR/no VR) in pain scores (60.68 vs 49.76; p = 0.2), ECV success rates (80% vs 76%; p = 0.7) or anxiety levels. The women receiving VR had a significantly higher anticipation of pain pre-procedurally (70.0 vs 50.0; p = 0.03). 20 (80%) of the VR women indicated that they would use VR again and 22 (88%) indicated they would recommend it to a friend having ECV. There were no significant differences between groups for side effects encountered or changes in vital signs. We have shown that using VR during ECV is feasible and appears safe. Our results inform the design of future RCTs.

Physician experience is associated with greater underestimation of patient pain

OBJECTIVE

Procedural pain is unique in that physicians simultaneously cause and assess it. Experienced male physicians are known to underestimate their female patients' pain more than other physicians. However, it is unknown whether this also occurs in obstetrics/gynecology, where all patients are females. This study addresses the gap in literature on procedural pain assessment accuracy.

METHODS

The present research compares paired pain evaluations from 20 obstetricians/gynecologists and their 92 female patients.

RESULTS

Our data demonstrate that patients' reported pain levels (M = 5.53, SD = 2.7) were significantly higher than their physicians' pain estimates (M = 4.89, SD = 2.19), t = 2.64, p < 0.005. The gap between patients' and physicians' pain estimates was greatest among physicians with the greatest procedural experience (M = 1.49, SD = 2.24), f = 5.72, p < 0.005. Male physicians underestimated their patients' pain significantly more than female physicians do, t = 2.27, p < 0.05.

CONCLUSION

Our results shed light on systematic underestimation of procedural pain and highlight the significance of experience and sex differences in pain evaluation.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Physicians' experience influences their perception of patient pain while performing procedures. Experienced male physicians, even those who exclusively treat female patients, need to be aware of this ubiquitous bias in assessing their female patients' procedural pain.

This baby is not for turning: Women's experiences of attempted external cephalic version

BACKGROUND

Existing studies regarding women's experiences surrounding an External Cephalic Version (ECV) report on women who have a persistent breech post ECV and give birth by caesarean section, or on women who had successful ECVs and plan for a vaginal birth. There is a paucity of understanding about the experience of women who attempt an ECV then plan a vaginal breech birth when their baby remains breech. The aim of this study was to examine women's experience of an ECV which resulted in a persistent breech presentation.

METHODS

A qualitative descriptive exploratory design was undertaken. In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted and analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Twenty two (n = 22) women who attempted an ECV and subsequently planned a vaginal breech birth participated. Twelve women had a vaginal breech birth (55 %) and 10 (45 %) gave birth by caesarean section. In relation to the ECV, there were five main themes identified: 'seeking an alternative', 'needing information', 'recounting the ECV experience', 'reacting to the unsuccessful ECV' and, 'reflecting on the value of an ECV'.

CONCLUSIONS

ECV should form part of a range of options provided to women, rather than a default procedure for management of the term breech. For motivated women who fit the safe criteria for vaginal breech birth, not being subjected to a painful experience (ECV) may be optimal. Women should be supported to access services that support vaginal breech birth if this is their choice, and continuity of care should be standard practice.