Cited by 11Maternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsPregnancy-related medical researchMaternal and fetal healthcare

Correction des variétés occipito-postérieures durant la phase de dilatation de l’accouchement : intérêt des postures maternelles

Guittier, M.-J., Othenin-Girard, V.·2012·Gynécologie Obstétrique & Fertilité

Abstract

Occipito-posterior presentation represents 10 to 34% of cephalic presentations in early labor. Spontaneous rotation during labor to occipito-anterior mode occurs in most cases, but 5 to 8% of fetuses will persist in posterior position for the expulsive phase of delivery. Previous research has shown that this presentation carries an increased risk of unusually long labor, maternal and fetal exhaustion, instrument-assisted delivery, severe perineal injury, and cesarean section. The diagnosis of posterior variety is usually made quite late at the end of dilation. Several researchers have reported the benefits of determining presentation during labor by transabdominal ultrasonography. Some obstetrical techniques to correct these presentations at complete dilation have also been described. In the case of diagnosis of posterior variety, the usual attitude is expectant management. Postural techniques to promote physiological labor and delivery have been documented in the literature. De Gasquet has described a very precise technique to facilitate fetal rotation, but its effectiveness has never been assessed scientifically. A Cochrane review on the topic has shown that similar positions are well accepted by women and reduce back pain. On the other hand, the sample size of included studies appeared inadequate to assess their interest for use in childbirth, in general, and for adverse outcomes associated with posterior presentation varieties in particular. Attempts to correct the fetal malposition during the expansion phase would allow to reduce adverse outcomes during the expulsive phase of delivery. Further research is necessary to assess the efficacity of specific maternal positions during labor for the correction of fetal posterior presentation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.gyobfe.2011.05.006

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Guittier, M.-J., & Othenin-Girard, V.
Affiliations
HES-SO Genève (CH)
Venue
Gynécologie Obstétrique & Fertilité
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-04
Volume
40
Issue
4
Pages
255-260
ISSN
1297-9589 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2167366907
Cited by
11
References
28
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
Type
journal article
Language
fr
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Gynécologie Obstétrique & Fertilité (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Pregnancy-related medical research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Maternal and fetal healthcare
Keywords
occiput posterior, labor, maternal position, fetal rotation, expulsive phase, transabdominal ultrasound, prolonged labor, perineal trauma, cesarean section, back pain
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Labor, Obstetric, Obstetric Labor Complications, Labor Presentation, Posture, Pregnancy, Retrospective Studies, Ultrasonography, Version, Fetal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review