Obstetrics & Gynecology Track the topics, authors and articles important to you
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Obstetrics & Gynecology 2004;103:513-518
© 2004 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, J. H.
Right arrow Articles by Maulik, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Johnson, J. H.
Right arrow Articles by Maulik, D.
Related Collections
Right arrow General obstetrics
Right arrow Labor and operative obstetrics

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Immediate Maternal and Neonatal Effects of Forceps and Vacuum-Assisted Deliveries

Jennifer H. Johnson, MD, Reinaldo Figueroa, MD, David Garry, DO, Andrew Elimian, MD and Dev Maulik, MD, PhD

From the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Winthrop-University Hospital, Mineola, New York, and the State University of New York at Stony Brook.

Address reprint requests to: Dr. Reinaldo Figueroa, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Winthrop-University Hospital, 259 First Street, Mineola, NY 11501; e-mail: rfigueroa{at}winthrop.org.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the differences in immediate maternal and neonatal effects of forceps and vacuum-assisted deliveries.

METHODS: We conducted a medical record review of all forceps and vacuum-assisted deliveries that occurred from January 1, 1998, to August 30, 1999, at Winthrop-University Hospital. Maternal demographics and delivery characteristics were recorded. Maternal outcomes, such as use of episiotomy and presence of lacerations, were studied. Neonatal outcomes evaluated were Apgar scores, neonatal intensive care unit admissions, cephalohematomas, instrument marks and bruising, and caput and molding.

RESULTS: Of 508 operative vaginal deliveries, 200 were forceps and 308 were vacuum assisted. Forceps were used more often than vacuum for prolonged second stage of labor (P = .001). There was a higher rate of epidural (P = .02) and pudendal (P < .001) anesthesia, episiotomies (P = .01), maternal third- and fourth-degree perineal (P < .001) and vaginal lacerations (P = .004) with the use of forceps, whereas periurethral lacerations were more common in vacuum-assisted (P = .026) deliveries. More instrument marks and bruising (P < .001) were found in the neonates delivered by forceps, whereas there was a greater incidence of cephalohematomas (P = .03) and caput and molding (P < .001) in the neonates delivered with vacuum. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that forceps use was associated with an increase in major perineal and vaginal tears (odds ratio [OR] 1.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.27, 2.69; P = .001), an increase in instrument marks and bruising (OR 4.63; 95% CI 2.90, 7.41; P < .001) and a decrease in cephalohematomas (OR 0.49; 95% CI 0.29, 0.83; P = .007) compared with the vacuum.

CONCLUSIONS: Maternal injuries are more common with the use of forceps. Neonates delivered with forceps have more facial injuries, whereas neonates delivered with vacuum have more cephalohematomas.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II-3






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2004 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.