The OdonAssist inflatable device for assisted vaginal birth-the ASSIST II study (United Kingdom).

BD Odon Device OdonAssist assisted vaginal birth feasibility intrapartum research management of second stage of labor medical device obstetrical forceps operative vaginal delivery perineal laceration safety vacuum ventouse

Journal

American journal of obstetrics and gynecology
ISSN: 1097-6868
Titre abrégé: Am J Obstet Gynecol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0370476

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Mar 2024
Historique:
received: 13 04 2023
revised: 17 05 2023
accepted: 17 05 2023
medline: 11 3 2024
pubmed: 11 3 2024
entrez: 10 3 2024
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Decreasing rates of assisted vaginal birth have been paralleled with increasing rates of cesarean deliveries over the last 40 years. The OdonAssist is a novel device for assisted vaginal birth. Iterative changes to clinical parameters, device design, and technique have been made to improve device efficacy and usability. This study aimed to determine if the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of the OdonAssist device were sufficient to justify conducting a future randomized controlled trial. An open-label nonrandomized study of 104 participants having a clinically indicated assisted vaginal birth using the OdonAssist was undertaken at Southmead Hospital, Bristol, United Kingdom. Data were also collected from participants who consented to participate in the study but for whom trained OdonAssist operators were not available, providing a nested cohort. The primary clinical outcome was the proportion of births successfully expedited with the OdonAssist. Secondary outcomes included clinical, patient-reported, operator-reported, device and health care utilization. Neonatal outcome data were reviewed at day 28, and maternal outcomes were investigated up to day 90. Given that the number of successful OdonAssist births was ≥61 out of 104, the hypothesis of a poor rate of 50% was rejected in favor of a good rate of ≥65%. Between August 2019 and June 2021, 941 (64%) of the 1471 approached, eligible participants consented to participate. Of these, 104 received the OdonAssist intervention. Birth was assisted in all cephalic vertex fetal positions, at all stations ≥1 cm below the ischial spines (with or without regional analgesia). The OdonAssist was effective in 69 of the 104 (66%) cases, consistent with the hypothesis of a good efficacy rate. There were no serious device-related maternal or neonatal adverse reactions, and there were no serious adverse device effects. Only 4% of neonatal soft tissue bruising in the successful OdonAssist group was considered device-related, as opposed to 20% and 23% in the unsuccessful OdonAssist group and the nested cohort, respectively. Participants reported high birth perception scores. All practitioners found the device use to be straightforward. Recruitment to an interventional study of a new device for assisted vaginal birth is feasible; 64% of eligible participants were willing to participate. The success rate of the OdonAssist was comparable to that of the Kiwi OmniCup when introduced in the same unit in 2002, meeting the threshold for a randomized controlled trial to compare the OdonAssist with current standard practice. There were no disadvantages of study participation in terms of maternal and neonatal outcomes. There were potential advantages of using the OdonAssist, particularly reduced neonatal soft tissue injury. The same application technique is used for all fetal positions, with all operators deeming the device straightforward to use. This study provides important data to inform future study design.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Decreasing rates of assisted vaginal birth have been paralleled with increasing rates of cesarean deliveries over the last 40 years. The OdonAssist is a novel device for assisted vaginal birth. Iterative changes to clinical parameters, device design, and technique have been made to improve device efficacy and usability.
OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to determine if the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of the OdonAssist device were sufficient to justify conducting a future randomized controlled trial.
STUDY DESIGN METHODS
An open-label nonrandomized study of 104 participants having a clinically indicated assisted vaginal birth using the OdonAssist was undertaken at Southmead Hospital, Bristol, United Kingdom. Data were also collected from participants who consented to participate in the study but for whom trained OdonAssist operators were not available, providing a nested cohort. The primary clinical outcome was the proportion of births successfully expedited with the OdonAssist. Secondary outcomes included clinical, patient-reported, operator-reported, device and health care utilization. Neonatal outcome data were reviewed at day 28, and maternal outcomes were investigated up to day 90. Given that the number of successful OdonAssist births was ≥61 out of 104, the hypothesis of a poor rate of 50% was rejected in favor of a good rate of ≥65%.
RESULTS RESULTS
Between August 2019 and June 2021, 941 (64%) of the 1471 approached, eligible participants consented to participate. Of these, 104 received the OdonAssist intervention. Birth was assisted in all cephalic vertex fetal positions, at all stations ≥1 cm below the ischial spines (with or without regional analgesia). The OdonAssist was effective in 69 of the 104 (66%) cases, consistent with the hypothesis of a good efficacy rate. There were no serious device-related maternal or neonatal adverse reactions, and there were no serious adverse device effects. Only 4% of neonatal soft tissue bruising in the successful OdonAssist group was considered device-related, as opposed to 20% and 23% in the unsuccessful OdonAssist group and the nested cohort, respectively. Participants reported high birth perception scores. All practitioners found the device use to be straightforward.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Recruitment to an interventional study of a new device for assisted vaginal birth is feasible; 64% of eligible participants were willing to participate. The success rate of the OdonAssist was comparable to that of the Kiwi OmniCup when introduced in the same unit in 2002, meeting the threshold for a randomized controlled trial to compare the OdonAssist with current standard practice. There were no disadvantages of study participation in terms of maternal and neonatal outcomes. There were potential advantages of using the OdonAssist, particularly reduced neonatal soft tissue injury. The same application technique is used for all fetal positions, with all operators deeming the device straightforward to use. This study provides important data to inform future study design.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38462264
pii: S0002-9378(23)00326-5
doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2023.05.018
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

S932-S946.e3

Investigateurs

Mike Algeo (M)
Mary Alvarez (M)
Sabaratnam Arulkumaran (S)
Nichola Bale (N)
Natalie S Blencowe (NS)
Kate Collins (K)
Joanna F Crofts (JF)
Fiona Day (F)
Elizabeth Deacon (E)
Timothy J Draycott (TJ)
Mohamed ElHodaiby (M)
Lily Exell (L)
Islam Gamaledin (I)
Anne Glover (A)
Simon Grant (S)
Sally Hall (S)
Cameron Hinton (C)
Emily J Hotton (EJ)
Hajeb Kamali (H)
Lisa Kirk (L)
Carolyn Lawson (C)
Erik Lenguerrand (E)
Helen Lewis-White (H)
Abi Loose (A)
Naomi Mallinson (N)
Katie Mettam (K)
Glen Mola (G)
Stephen O'Brien (S)
Alison Pike (A)
Rachel Powell (R)
Iona Reading (I)
Claire Rose (C)
Julia Wade (J)
Kathryn Walpole (K)
Paul White (P)
Cathy Winter (C)
Karen Woods (K)

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Emily J Hotton (EJ)

Women and Children's Research Centre, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom; Translational Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, United Kingdom. Electronic address: emily.hotton@nhs.net.

Nichola Bale (N)

Women and Children's Research Centre, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom.

Claire Rose (C)

Women and Children's Research Centre, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom.

Paul White (P)

Mathematics and Statistics Research Group, University of the West of England, Bristol, United Kingdom.

Julia Wade (J)

Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.

Nicolas Mottet (N)

Pôle Mère-Femme, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital of Besançon, University of Franche-Comté, Besançon, France; Nanomedicine Lab, Imagery and Therapeutics, University of Franche-Comté, Besançon, France.

Abi J Loose (AJ)

Women and Children's Research Centre, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom.

Mohamed Elhodaiby (M)

Women and Children's Research Centre, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom; Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.

Erik Lenguerrand (E)

Translational Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, United Kingdom.

Tim J Draycott (TJ)

Women and Children's Research Centre, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom.

Joanna F Crofts (JF)

Women and Children's Research Centre, Southmead Hospital, North Bristol NHS Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom.

Classifications MeSH