Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m8s7h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T03:09:46.975Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 6 - Rotational Forceps

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  aN Invalid Date NaN

By
Karl SJ Oláh
Edited by
George Attilakos ,
Sharon Jordan ,
Michele Mohajer ,
Glen Mola ,
Stephen O'Brien  and
Dimitrios Siassakos
George Attilakos
Affiliation:
University College London
Sharon Jordan
Affiliation:
Southmead Hospital, Bristol
Michele Mohajer
Affiliation:
Shropshire Women and Children’s Centre
Glen Mola
Affiliation:
University of Papua New Guinea
Stephen O'Brien
Affiliation:
University of Bristol
Dimitrios Siassakos
Affiliation:
University College London
Get access

Summary

In 1915, Christian Kielland (1871–1941) first described his forceps to achieve birth from the mid-pelvis in cases of malrotation (OP and OT positions of the fetal head). Kielland (sometimes spelt Kjelland) described his forceps to be applied for a condition that would not be applicable today (the fetal head arrested in a high transverse or OP position), and in a manner which would be considered dangerous in modern practice. However, the instrument was adopted and adapted in the twentieth century and became popular for use by obstetricians in cases of malposition.

Type
Chapter
Information
ROBuST: RCOG Assisted Birth Simulation Training
Course Manual
 , pp. 84 - 97
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2024

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Oláh, KS. In praise of Kielland’s forceps. Bjog Int J Obstetrics Gynaecol. 2002;109(5):492–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kielland, C. Über die Anlegung der Zange am nicht rotierten Kopf mit Beschreibung eines neuen Zangenmodelles und einer neuen Anlegungsmethode. Gynecol Obstet Inves. 1916;43(1):48–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, PN, Johnson, IR. A study of the effect of rotational forceps delivery on fetal acid‐base balance. Acta Obstet Gyn Scan. 1994;73(10):787–9.Google ScholarPubMed
Caughey, AB, Sandberg, PL, Zlatnik, MG et al. Forceps compared with vacuum: rates of neonatal and maternal morbidity. Obstetrics Gynecol. 2006;107(3):740.Google Scholar
Johanson, RB, Heycock, E, Carter, J et al. Maternal and child health after assisted vaginal delivery: five-year follow up of a randomised controlled study comparing forceps and ventouse. Bjog Int J Obstetrics Gynaecol. 2014;121 Suppl 7(s7):23–8.Google Scholar
Healy, DL, Quinn, MA, Pepperell, RJ. Rotational delivery of the fetus: Kielland’s forceps and two other methods compared. Bjog Int J Obstetrics Gynaecol. 1982;89(7):501–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O’Brien, S, Day, F, Lenguerrand, E et al. Rotational forceps versus manual rotation and direct forceps: a retrospective cohort study. Eur J Obstet Gyn R B. 2017;212:119–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herabutya, Y, O‐Prasertsawat, P, Boonrangsimant, P. Kielland’s forceps or ventouse – a comparison. Bjog Int J Obstetrics Gynaecol. 1988;95(5):483–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Giacchino, T, Karkia, R, Zhang, W et al. Kielland’s rotational forceps delivery: a comparison of maternal and neonatal outcomes with rotational ventouse or second stage caesarean section deliveries. Eur J Obstet Gyn R B. 2020;254:175–80.Google ScholarPubMed
Tempest, N, Hart, A, Walkinshaw, S, Hapangama, DK. A re-evaluation of the role of rotational forceps: retrospective comparison of maternal and perinatal outcomes following different methods of birth for malposition in the second stage of labour. Bjog Int J Obstetrics Gynaecol [Internet]. 2013 ;120(10):1277–84. message:%3C20151214135111.544944B82DB@nhs-pd1e-esg005.ad1.nhs.net%3ECrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stock, SJ, Josephs, K, Farquharson, S et al. Maternal and neonatal outcomes of successful Kiellandʼs rotational forceps delivery. Obstetrics Gynecol. [Internet]. 2013;121(5):1032–9. message:%3C20151214135111.544944B82DB@nhs-pd1e-esg005.ad1.nhs.net%3EGoogle Scholar
Bahl, R, Van deVenne, M, Macleod, M, Strachan, B, Murphy, DJ. Maternal and neonatal morbidity in relation to the instrument used for mid-cavity rotational operative vaginal delivery: a prospective cohort study. Bjog Int J Obstetrics Gynaecol. 2013;120(12):1526–33.Google Scholar
Burke, N, Field, K, Mujahid, F, Morrison, JJ. Use and safety of Kiellandʼs forceps in current obstetric practice. Obstetrics Gynecol. 2012;120(4):766–70.Google Scholar
O’Mahony, F, Hofmeyer, GJ, Menon, V. Choice of instruments for assisted vaginal delivery. O’Mahony, F, editor. Cochrane Db Syst Rev. 2010;(11):CD005455.Google Scholar
García‐Mejido, JA, Fernández‐Palacín, A, Barby, MJB et al. A comparable rate of levator ani muscle injury in operative vaginal delivery (forceps and vacuum) according to the characteristics of the instrumentation. Acta Obstet Gyn Scan. 2019;98(6):729–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinha, P, Dutta, A, Langford, K. Instrumental delivery: how to meet the need for improvements in training. Obstetrician Gynaecol. 2010;12(4):265–71.Google Scholar
Unterscheider, J, McMenamin, M, Cullinane, F. Rising rates of caesarean deliveries at full cervical dilatation: a concerning trend. Eur J Obstet Gyn R B. 2011;157(2):141–4.Google ScholarPubMed
Oláh, KS. Reversal of the decision for caesarean section in the second stage of labour on the basis of consultant vaginal assessment. J Obstet Gynaecol [Internet]. 2005;25(2):115–6. message:%3C20160201144906.2B157449038@nhs-pd1e-esg006.ad1.nhs.net%3EGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, EA, Barr, C, Thomas, K. The mode of delivery in women taken to theatre at full dilatation: does consultant presence make a difference? J Obstet Gynaecol. 2011;31(3):229–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chung, W-H, Li, Y-Y, Kong, C-W, WW-K, To. Association between rates of second-stage caesarean section and instrumental delivery. Hong Kong J Gynaecol Obstetrics Midwifery. 2019;19(2):89–95.Google Scholar
Tempest, N, Lane, S, Hapangama, D ; UK Audit Research Trainee Collaborative in Obstetrics, Gynaecology (UK‐ARCOG). Babies in occiput posterior position are significantly more likely to require an emergency cesarean birth compared with babies in occiput transverse position in the second stage of labor: a prospective observational study. Acta Obstet Gyn Scan. 2020;99(4):537–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murphy, DJ, Strachan, BK, Bahl, R on behalf of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Assisted Vaginal Birth: Green-Top Guideline No. 26. Bjog Int J Obstetrics Gynaecol. 2020;127: e70–e112.Google Scholar
Watson, HA, Carter, J, David, AL, Seed, PT, Shennan, AH. Full dilation cesarean section: a risk factor for recurrent second-trimester loss and preterm birth. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. 2017;96(9):1100–5.Google ScholarPubMed
Bahl, R, Strachan, B, Murphy, DJ. Pelvic floor morbidity at 3 years after instrumental delivery and cesarean delivery in the second stage of labor and the impact of a subsequent delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192(3):789–94.Google ScholarPubMed
Murphy, DJ, Liebling, RE, Verity, L, Swingler, R, Patel, R. Early maternal and neonatal morbidity associated with operative delivery in second stage of labour: a cohort study. The Lancet. 2001;358(9289):1203–7.Google ScholarPubMed
Anim‐Somuah, M, Smyth, RM, Cyna, AM, Cuthbert, A. Epidural versus non‐epidural or no analgesia for pain management in labour. Cochrane Db Syst Rev. 2018;2018(5):CD000331.Google Scholar
Arulkumaran, S, Robson, M. Munro Kerr’s Operative Obstetrics. 13th ed. Arulkumaran, S, Robson, M, editors. London, UK: Elsevier; 2019. p. 320.Google Scholar
UKARCOG. ReDEFINe (Rotational DElivery at Full dIlatatioN). 2018. (RCOG National Trainees Conference). http://ukarcog.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/ReDEFINe-facts-and-figures-poster.pdfGoogle Scholar
Murphy, DJ, Macleod, M, Bahl, R, Strachan, B. A cohort study of maternal and neonatal morbidity in relation to use of sequential instruments at operative vaginal delivery. Eur J Obstet Gyn R B. 2011;156(1):41–5.Google ScholarPubMed
Tempest, N, McGuinness, N, Lane, S, Hapangama, DK. Neonatal and maternal outcomes of successful manual rotation to correct malposition of the fetal head; a retrospective and prospective observational study. PLoS one. 2017;12(5):e0176861.Google Scholar
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Consent Advice No. 11 – Operative Vaginal Birth [Internet]. London, UK: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists; 2010. https://www.rcog.org.uk/globalassets/documents/guidelines/ca11-15072010.pdfGoogle Scholar
Bellussi, F, Ghi, T, Youssef, A et al. The use of intrapartum ultrasound to diagnose malpositions and cephalic malpresentations. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217(6):633–41.Google ScholarPubMed
Parry-Jones, E. The use of Kielland’s forceps. Br J Clin Pract. 1952;11(6):434–43.Google Scholar
Aiken, AR, Aiken, CE, Alberry, MS, Brockelsby, JC, Scott, JG. Management of fetal malposition in the second stage of labor: a propensity score analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol [Internet]. 2015;212(3):355.e1-355.e7. message:%3C20151214135424.88D364B836F@nhs-pd1e-esg009.ad1.nhs.net%3EGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×