Vacuum extraction: Is there any need to improve the current training in the UK?

Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica

Volumn 83, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 466-470

  Sau, Ashis ^a   Sau, Mita ^b   Ahmed, Hasib ^c   Brown, Richard ^b,d  

^a ST THOMAS HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b Princess Royal University Hospital   (United Kingdom)

^c MEDWAY MARITIME HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^d Prncs Roy Univ Hospital Orpington   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Training; Vacuum extraction

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INSTRUMENT; INSTRUMENTATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PEDIATRICIAN; PHYSICIAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; UNITED KINGDOM; VACUUM EXTRACTION; VACUUM EXTRACTOR;

CLINICAL COMPETENCE; ENGLAND; FEMALE; HUMANS; OBSTETRICS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PREGNANCY; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; VACUUM EXTRACTION, OBSTETRICAL;

EID: 2042503040     PISSN: 00016349     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0001-6349.2004.0399.x     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Chalmers JA, Chalmers I. The obstetric vacuum extractor is the instrument of first choice for operative vaginal delivery. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1989; 96: 505-6.
2. Bird GC. The use of the vacuum extractor. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1988; 9: 641-61.
3. Johanson RB, Menon BKV. Vacuum extraction versus forceps delivery for assisted vaginal delivery. The Cochrane Database of Systemic Reviews. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 4. Oxford: Update Software, 1999.
4. Towner D, Castro MA, Eby-wilkens E, Gilbert WM. Effect of mode of delivery in nulliparous women on neonatal intracranial injury. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 1709-14.
5. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Instrumental vaginal delivery. Guideline no. 26. London: RCOG, 2000.
6. Chenoy R, Johanson R. A randomized prospective study comparing delivery with metal and silicon rubber vacuum extractor cups. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1992; 99: 360-3.
7. Low J, Ng TY, Chew SY. Clinical experiences with the silc cup vacuum extractor. Singapore Med J 1993; 34: 135-8.
8. Cohn M, Barclay C, Fraser R, Zaklama M, Johanson R, Anderson D et al. Multicentre randomised trial comparing delivery with a silicon rubber cup and rigid metal vacuum extractor cups. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1989; 96: 545-51.
9. Johanson R, Menon V. Soft versus rigid vacuum extractor cups for assisted vaginal delivery. The Cochrane Database of Systemic Reviews. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 2. Oxford: Update Software, 2000.
10. Hofmeyr GJ, Gobetz L, Sonnendecker EW, Turner M. New design rigid and soft vacuum extractor cups: a preliminary comparison of traction forces. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990; 97: 681-5.
11. Bofill JA, Rust OA, Perry KG, Roberts WE. Operative vaginal delivery: a survey of fellows of ACOG. Obstet Gynecol 1996; 88: 1007-10.
12. Meniru GI. An analysis of the recent trends in vacuum extraction and forceps delivery in the United Kingdom. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1996; 103: 168-70.
13. Vacca A. Vacuum extraction. In: Choices with child birth; progress of labour and vacuum extraction. Brisbane: Vacca Research, 1997 (on CD-ROM).
14. Johanson RB, Lucking P. The road to success using the ventouse. 1999: Copyright: Baby Lifeline, Empathy Enterprise Building, Bramston Crescent, Tile Hill Lane, Tile Hill, Coventry CV4 9SW, UK.
15. Johanson RB, Cox C, O'Donnell E, Grady K, Howell CJ, Jones PW. Managing obstetric emergencies and trauma (MOET). Structured skills training using models and reality based-scenarios. Obstetrician Gynaecologist 1999; 1: 46-52.