Are women adequately informed about the use of instrumentation during vaginal delivery? A prospective review of the information on instrumental delivery provided to pregnant women and a retrospective review of the quality of consent for instrumental delivery

IF 2.9 3区医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY

Colorectal Disease Pub Date : 2025-03-11 DOI:10.1111/codi.70050

Alessandra Orlando, Gregory P. Thomas, Ruwan Fernando, Jamie Murphy, Nada Elsaid, Stella Dilke, Carolynne J. Vaizey

{"title":"Are women adequately informed about the use of instrumentation during vaginal delivery? A prospective review of the information on instrumental delivery provided to pregnant women and a retrospective review of the quality of consent for instrumental delivery","authors":"Alessandra Orlando, Gregory P. Thomas, Ruwan Fernando, Jamie Murphy, Nada Elsaid, Stella Dilke, Carolynne J. Vaizey","doi":"10.1111/codi.70050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>Instrumental delivery typically describes the use of ventouse or forceps to aid vaginal delivery. They are used in 10%–15% of all vaginal deliveries and in almost a third of all primiparous deliveries. They are associated with an increased risk of maternal and neonatal injury. Such maternal injuries may lead to significant functional problems such as faecal incontinence and these conditions can be life changing. Informed consent should be obtained before any medical procedure. This should be taken well before the procedure, documented clearly, and alternatives should be discussed. The aim of this study was to assess the information provided to pregnant women and the quality of consent obtained prior to instrumental vaginal delivery.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>Patients were approached at 36 weeks’ gestation, prior to a planned vaginal delivery. The study was undertaken in the Obstetric Department of a busy District General Hospital in the UK. The patients’ understanding of labour, vaginal delivery and the use of instrumentation was assessed. Clinical notes of women who had an assisted vaginal delivery were reviewed to ascertain time of consent for use of instrumentation and amount of analgesia received at that point.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 138 patients were included for prospective assessment. Only 4% were able to describe all stages of labour, 17% could describe some of the stages of labour and 78% were unable to describe any of the stages of labour. Eighty per cent of the participants were unaware that instrumentation may be used during delivery, 21% were aware that it may be used if necessary and only 2% were aware of the risk of maternal injury. Fifty-nine case notes were reviewed. All had undergone either forceps or ventouse instrumentation. Eighteen per cent showed no record of informed consent. Sixty-one per cent showed evidence of verbal consent and 20% had a signed consent in the clinical notes. All had been consented for use of instrumentation during the second stage of labour, often when opioid analgesia had been administered prior to consent.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Knowledge about labour and the use of instrumentation during delivery appeared to be poor. The quality of consent taken for instrumental delivery appeared to be sub-standard. Larger studies, done post the COVID-19 epidemic, are needed to confirm that similar practices still occur in other hospitals and, if this is the case, urgent measures need to be taken to correct this.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10512,"journal":{"name":"Colorectal Disease","volume":"27 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/codi.70050","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Colorectal Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/codi.70050","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim

Instrumental delivery typically describes the use of ventouse or forceps to aid vaginal delivery. They are used in 10%–15% of all vaginal deliveries and in almost a third of all primiparous deliveries. They are associated with an increased risk of maternal and neonatal injury. Such maternal injuries may lead to significant functional problems such as faecal incontinence and these conditions can be life changing. Informed consent should be obtained before any medical procedure. This should be taken well before the procedure, documented clearly, and alternatives should be discussed. The aim of this study was to assess the information provided to pregnant women and the quality of consent obtained prior to instrumental vaginal delivery.

Method

Patients were approached at 36 weeks’ gestation, prior to a planned vaginal delivery. The study was undertaken in the Obstetric Department of a busy District General Hospital in the UK. The patients’ understanding of labour, vaginal delivery and the use of instrumentation was assessed. Clinical notes of women who had an assisted vaginal delivery were reviewed to ascertain time of consent for use of instrumentation and amount of analgesia received at that point.

Results

A total of 138 patients were included for prospective assessment. Only 4% were able to describe all stages of labour, 17% could describe some of the stages of labour and 78% were unable to describe any of the stages of labour. Eighty per cent of the participants were unaware that instrumentation may be used during delivery, 21% were aware that it may be used if necessary and only 2% were aware of the risk of maternal injury. Fifty-nine case notes were reviewed. All had undergone either forceps or ventouse instrumentation. Eighteen per cent showed no record of informed consent. Sixty-one per cent showed evidence of verbal consent and 20% had a signed consent in the clinical notes. All had been consented for use of instrumentation during the second stage of labour, often when opioid analgesia had been administered prior to consent.

Conclusion

Knowledge about labour and the use of instrumentation during delivery appeared to be poor. The quality of consent taken for instrumental delivery appeared to be sub-standard. Larger studies, done post the COVID-19 epidemic, are needed to confirm that similar practices still occur in other hospitals and, if this is the case, urgent measures need to be taken to correct this.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Colorectal Disease 医学-胃肠肝病学

CiteScore

6.10

自引率

11.80%

发文量

406

审稿时长

1.5 months

期刊介绍： Diseases of the colon and rectum are common and offer a number of exciting challenges. Clinical, diagnostic and basic science research is expanding rapidly. There is increasing demand from purchasers of health care and patients for clinicians to keep abreast of the latest research and developments, and to translate these into routine practice. Technological advances in diagnosis, surgical technique, new pharmaceuticals, molecular genetics and other basic sciences have transformed many aspects of how these diseases are managed. Such progress will accelerate. Colorectal Disease offers a real benefit to subscribers and authors. It is first and foremost a vehicle for publishing original research relating to the demanding, rapidly expanding field of colorectal diseases. Essential for surgeons, pathologists, oncologists, gastroenterologists and health professionals caring for patients with a disease of the lower GI tract, Colorectal Disease furthers education and inter-professional development by including regular review articles and discussions of current controversies. Note that the journal does not usually accept paediatric surgical papers.