Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 258

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Training for Shoulder Dystocia: A Trial of Simulation Using Low-Fidelity and High-Fidelity Mannequins

Crofts, Joanna F., Bartlett, Christine, Ellis, Denise, Hunt, Linda P., Fox, Robert, Draycott, Timothy J.·2006·Obstetrics & Gynecology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of simulation training for shoulder dystocia management and compare training using a high-fidelity mannequin with that using traditional devices. METHODS: Training was undertaken in six hospitals and a medical simulation center in the United Kingdom. Midwives and obstetricians working for participating hospitals were eligible for inclusion. One hundred forty participants (45 doctors, 95 midwives) were randomized to training with a high-fidelity training mannequin (incorporating force perception training) or traditional low-fidelity mannequins. Performance was assessed pre- and posttraining, using a videoed, standardized shoulder dystocia simulation. Outcome measures were delivery, head-to-body delivery time, use of appropriate and inappropriate actions, force applied, and communication. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-two participants completed the posttraining assessment. All training was associated with improved performance: use of basic maneuvers 114 of 140 (81.4%) to 125 of 132 (94.7%) (P=.002), successful deliveries 60 of 140 (42.9%) to 110 of 132 (83.3%) (P<.001), good communication with the patient 79 of 139 (56.8%) to 109 of 132 (82.6%) (P<.001), pre- and posttraining, respectively. Training with the high-fidelity mannequin was associated with a higher successful delivery rate than training with traditional devices: 94% compared with 72% (odds ratio 6.53, 95% confidence interval 2.05-20.81; P=.002). Total applied force was significantly lower for those who had undergone force training (2,030 Newton seconds versus 2,916 Newton seconds; P=.006) but there was no significant difference in the peak applied force 102 Newtons versus 112 Newtons (P=.242). CONCLUSION: This study verifies the need for shoulder dystocia training; before training only 43% participants could achieve delivery. All training with mannequins improved the management of simulated shoulder dystocia. Training on a high-fidelity mannequin, including force perception teaching, offered additional training benefits. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/01.aog.0000246801.45977.c8

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 258

Metadata

Authors
Crofts, J. F., Bartlett, C., Ellis, D., Hunt, L. P., Fox, R., & Draycott, T. J.
Venue
Obstetrics & Gynecology
Published
2006-12
Volume
108
Issue
6
Pages
1477-1485
ISSN
0029-7844 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2048687279
Cited by
258
References
0
FWCI
8.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Training for Shoulder Dystocia: A Trial of Simulation Using Low-Fidelity and High-Fidelity Mannequins. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/01.aog.0000246801.45977.c8
The paper
Crofts, J. F., Bartlett, C., Ellis, D., Hunt, L. P., Fox, R., & Draycott, T. J. (2006). Training for Shoulder Dystocia: A Trial of Simulation Using Low-Fidelity and High-Fidelity Mannequins. Obstetrics & Gynecology. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.aog.0000246801.45977.c8

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.