TNO Quality of Life, PO Box 2215, 2301 CE Leiden, The Netherlands.
Birth. 2010 Jun;37(2):124-33. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2010.00392.x.
Until recently, external cephalic version to prevent breech presentation at birth was not widely accepted. The objective of our study was to assess the prevalence, outcomes, and women's experiences of external cephalic version to improve the implementation of the procedure in the Netherlands.
A prospective cohort study was conducted of 167 women under the care of a midwife with confirmed breech presentation at a gestational age of 33 completed weeks or more.
Between June 2007 and January 2008, 167 women with a confirmed breech presentation were offered an external cephalic version. Of this group, 123 women (73.7%, 95% CI: 65.5-80.5) subsequently received the version. These women had about a ninefold increased probability of a cephalic presentation at birth compared with women who did not undergo a version (relative risk [RR]: 8.8, 95% CI: 2.2-34.8). The chance of a vaginal birth after an external cephalic version was almost threefold (RR: 2.7, 95% CI: 1.5-5.0). The success rate was 39 percent, although considerable differences existed associated with region and parity. Ninety-four percent of women with a successful version rated it as a good experience compared with 71 percent of women who had a failed version (p = 0.015). Significant pain during the version was experienced by 34 percent of women, of whom 18 percent also experienced fear during the version, compared with no women who reported little or no pain (p = 0.006). Women who reported significant pain or fear during the version experienced the version more negatively (OR: 6.0, 95% CI: 3.3-12.2 and OR: 2.7, 95% CI: 1.1-6.0, respectively).
One in every four women with a breech presentation in independent midwifery care did not receive an external cephalic version. Of the women who received a version one third experienced significant pain during the procedure. Considerable regional variation in success rate existed.
直到最近,外倒转术(EECV)预防臀位分娩还未被广泛接受。我们的研究目的是评估 EECV 的流行率、结局和女性体验,以改善荷兰的 EECV 实施。
对 167 名在助产士照料下、经证实为 33 孕周及以上的臀位孕妇进行前瞻性队列研究。
2007 年 6 月至 2008 年 1 月,167 名经证实为臀位的孕妇被提供 EECV。其中,123 名(73.7%,95%可信区间:65.5-80.5)孕妇随后接受了 EECV。与未接受 EECV 的孕妇相比,接受 EECV 的孕妇在阴道分娩时转为头位的可能性增加了近 9 倍(相对风险 [RR]:8.8,95%可信区间:2.2-34.8)。EECV 后阴道分娩的可能性增加了近 3 倍(RR:2.7,95%可信区间:1.5-5.0)。成功率为 39%,尽管存在与地区和产次相关的显著差异。94%的成功 EECV 孕妇将其评价为良好体验,而 71%的失败 EECV 孕妇将其评价为不良体验(p=0.015)。34%的 EECV 孕妇在 EECV 过程中经历了显著疼痛,其中 18%的孕妇在 EECV 过程中还感到恐惧,而无任何报告轻微或无疼痛的孕妇(p=0.006)。报告在 EECV 过程中经历显著疼痛或恐惧的孕妇对 EECV 的评价更差(OR:6.0,95%可信区间:3.3-12.2 和 OR:2.7,95%可信区间:1.1-6.0)。
在独立的助产士护理下,每 4 名臀位孕妇中就有 1 名未接受 EECV。接受 EECV 的孕妇中,有 1/3 在手术过程中经历了显著疼痛。成功率存在显著的地区差异。