Skip to main content Accessibility help
Hostname: page-component-7f7b94f6bd-q7wkk Total loading time: 1.777 Render date: 2022-06-30T11:52:15.177Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Section 3 - Intrapartum Emergencies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 May 2021

Edwin Chandraharan
St George's University of London
Sir Sabaratnam Arulkumaran
St George's University of London
Get access
Obstetric and Intrapartum Emergencies
A Practical Guide to Management
, pp. 51 - 132
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

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.)


Rameez, MFM, Goonewardene, M. Uterine rupture. In Chandraharan, E, Arulkumaran, S (eds), Obstetric and Intrapartum Emergencies: A Practical Guide to Management, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012, 52–8.Google Scholar
Turner, MJ. Uterine rupture. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2002;16(1):6979. DOI: 10.1053/beog.2001.0256.Google ScholarPubMed
Al-Zirqi, I, Kjersti Daltveit, A, Forsén, L, Stray-Pedersen, B, Vangen, S. Risk factors for complete uterine rupture. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;216:165.e1-8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Birth After Previous Caesarean Birth. Green-top Guideline No. 45, October 2015. London: RCOG.Google Scholar
Cahill, AG, Stamilio, DM, Odibo, AO, Peipert, JF, Stevens, EJ, Macones, GA. Does a maximum dose of oxytocin affect risk for uterine rupture in candidates for vaginal birth after cesarean delivery? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197:495.e15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nassar, N, Roberts, CL, Barratt, A, Bell, JC, Olive, EC, Peat, B. Systematic review of adverse outcomes of external cephalic version and persisting breech presentation at term. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2006;20(2):163–71. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3016.2006.00702.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Landon, MB, Spong, CY, Thom, E, Hauth, JC, Bloom, SL, Varner, MW, et al. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. Risk of uterine rupture with a trial of labor in women with multiple and single prior cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108:1220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stamilio, DM, DeFranco, E, Paré, E, Odibo, AO, Peipert, JF, Allsworth, JE, Macones, GA. Short interpregnancy interval: risk of uterine rupture and complications of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery. Obstet Anesth Dig. 2008;28(2):91, DOI: 10.1097/01.aoa.0000319805.82200.c5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Di Spiezio, Sardo A, Saccone, G, McCurdy, R, Bujold, E, Bifulco, G, Berghella, V. Risk of Cesarean scar defect following single- vs double-layer uterine closure: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;50(5):578–83. DOI: 10.1002/uog.17401.Google Scholar
Ofir, K, Sheiner, E, Levy, A, Katz, M, Mazor, M. Uterine rupture: risk factors and pregnancy outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;189(4):1042–6. DOI: 10.1067/s0002-9378(03)01052-4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde Assistential. Assistance recommendations for prevention, diagnosis and treatment of obstetric hemorrhage. Brasília: OPAS; 2018.Google Scholar
Palacios-Jaraquemada, J, Fiorillo, A. Conservative approach in heavy postpartum hemorrhage associated with coagulopathy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2010;89(9):1222–5. DOI: 10.3109/00016349.2010.491524.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larrea, NA, Metz, TD. Pregnancy after uterine rupture. Obstet Gynecol. 2017. DOI: 10.1097/aog.0000000000002373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Management of Breech Presentation. Green top guidelines No. 20b. London: RCOG; 2017.Google Scholar
Winter, C, Crofts, J, Laxton, C, Barnfield, S, Draycott, T. PROMPT Course Manual, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012, 179–91.Google Scholar
Bin, YS, Ford, JB, Nicholl, M, Roberts, C. Long-term childhood outcomes of breech presentation by intended mode of delivery: a population record linkage study. Acta Obstet Gynecol. 2017;96(3):342–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Edmonds, K. Dewhurst’s Textbook of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 8th ed. Chichester: Blackwell Science; 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paterson-Brown, S, Howell, C. Managing Obstetric Emergencies and Trauma, 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2016, 405–13.Google Scholar
Barrett, JF, Hannah, ME, Hutton, EK, Willan, AR, Allen, AC, Armson, BA, et al. Twin Birth Study Collaborative Group. A randomized trial of planned cesarean or vaginal delivery for twin pregnancy. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:1295–305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rzyska, E, Ajay, B, Chandraharan, E. Safety of vaginal delivery among dichorionic diamniotic twins over 10 years in a UK teaching hospital. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2017;136(1):98101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Azria, E, Le Meaux, JP, Khoshnood, B. Factors associated with adverse perinatal outcomes for term breech fetuses with planned vaginal delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;207(4):285.e1-9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goffinet, F, Carayol, M, Foidart, JM, Alexander, S, Uzan, S, Subtil, D, et al. Is planned vaginal delivery for breech presentation at term still an option? Results of an observational prospective survey in France and Belgium. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194(4):1002–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fruscalzo, A, Londero, AP, Salvador, S, Bertozzi, S, Biasioli, A, Della Martina, M, et al. New and old predictive factors for breech presentation: our experience in 14 433 singleton pregnancies and a literature review. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27(2):167–72.Google ScholarPubMed
Londero, AP, Salvador, S, Fruscalzo, A, et al. First trimester PAPP-A MoM values predictive for breech presentation at term of pregnancy. Gynaecol Endocrinol. 2013;29(5):503–7.Google ScholarPubMed
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Caesarean Section Consent Advice No.7. London: RCOG; 2009.Google Scholar
Vistad, I, Klungsoyr, K, Albrechtsen, S, Skieldestad, F. Neonatal outcome of singleton breech deliveries in Norway from 1991 to 2011. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2015;94(9):9971004.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lin, MG. Umbilical cord prolapse. Obstet Gynaecol Surv. 2006;61(4):269–77.Google ScholarPubMed
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Umbilical Cord Prolapse. Green-top Guideline No. 50. London: RCOG, 2014.Google Scholar
Institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Royal College of Physicians of Ireland and the Clinical Strategy and Programmes Division, Health Service Executive. Clinical Practice Guideline Cord Prolapse. Guideline 35. 2015.Google Scholar
Gibbons, C, O’Herlihy, C, Murphy, JF. Umbilical cord prolapse: changing patterns and improved outcomes. BJOG. 2014;121:1705–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, KC, Daviss, BA. Outcomes of planned home birth with certified professional midwives: large prospective study in North America. BMJ. 2005;330:1416–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dilbaz, B, Ozturkoglu, E, Dilbaz, S, Ozturk, N, Akin Sivaslioglu, A, Haberal, A. Risk factors and perinatal outcomes associated with umbilical cord prolapse. Arch Gynaecol Obstet. 2006;274:104–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ezra, Y, Strasberg, SR, Farine, D. Does cord presentation on ultrasound predict cord prolapse? Gynaecol Obstet Invest. 2003;56:69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kinugasa, M, Sato, T, Tamura, M, Suzuki, H, Miyazaki, Y, Imanaka, M. Antepartum detection of cord presentation by transvaginal ultrasonography for term breech presentation: potential prediction and prevention of cord prolapse. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2007;33(5):612–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Driscoll, JA, Sadan, O, Van Geideren, CJ, Holloway, GA. Cord prolapse: can we save more babies? Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1987;94:594–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sowter, M, Weaver, E, Beaves, M, eds. Practical Obstetric Multi-Professional Training (PROMPT) Course Manual. Australian and New Zealand Edition. Melbourne Australia: PROMPT Maternity Foundation and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, London, Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists; 2014, 117–24.Google Scholar
Paterson-Brown, S, Howell, C, eds. Managing Obstetric Emergencies and Trauma – the MOET Course Manual, 3rd ed. London: Cambridge University Press; 2017, 233–7.Google Scholar
Department of Health, Government of South Australia. South Australian Perinatal Practice Guidelines: Cord Presentation and Prolapse, 2014.Google Scholar
McKeen, D, Geeorge, RB, Shukla, R. We ‘can do it’ does not mean we ‘should do it’: obesity, umbilical cord prolapse, and spinal anesthesia in the knee-chest position. Can J Anesthes. 2009;56:168–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Preterm Prelabour Rupture of Membranes. Green-top Guideline No. 44. London: RCOG, 2006.Google Scholar
Enakpene, CA, Odukogbe, AT, Morhason-Bello, IO, Omigbodun, AO, Arowojulu, AO. The influence of health-seeking behavior on the incidence and perinatal outcome of umbilical cord prolapse in Nigeria. Int J Womens Health. 2010;9(2):177–82.Google Scholar
Siassakos, D, Hasafa, Z, Sibanda, T, Fox, R, Donald, F, Winter, C, Draycott, T. Retrospective cohort study of diagnosis-delivery interval with umbilical cord prolapse: the effect of team training. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2009;116:1089–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beard, RW, Filshie, GM, Knight, CA, Roberts, GM. The significance of the changes in the continuous fetal heart rate in the first stage of labour. BJOG. 1971;78:865–81. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1971.tb00198.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Curzen, P, Mclintock, DG, Patel, M. Reliability of cardiotocography in predicting baby’s condition at birth. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1984;289(November):1345–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alfirevic, Z, Devane, D, Gyte, GML, Cuthbert, A. Continuous cardiotocography (CTG) as a form of electronic fetal monitoring (EFM) for fetal assessment during labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;2017(2). DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006066.pub3.Google Scholar
Maternal Consortium. Confidential Enquiries into Stillbirths and Deaths in Infancy. 4th Annual Report. London; 1997.Google Scholar
Chandraharan, E. Rational approach to electronic fetal monitoring during labour in ‘all’ resource settings. Sri Lanka J Obstet Gynaecol. 2012;32(4):7784. DOI: Scholar
Chandraharan, E, Sabaratnam, A. Prevention of birth asphyxia: responding appropriately to cardiotocograph (CTG) traces. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2007;21(4):609–24. DOI: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2007.02.008.Google ScholarPubMed
Chandraharan, E. Fetal electrocardiograph (ST-analyser or STAN) for intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring: a friend or a foe? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2018;31(1):123–7. DOI: 10.1080/14767058.2016.1276559.Google ScholarPubMed
INFANT Collaborative Group. Computerised interpretation of fetal heart rate during labour (INFANT): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2017;389(10080):1719–29. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30568-8.Google Scholar
Nunes, I, Ayres-de-Campos, D, Ugwumadu, A; Fetal Monitoring and Alert (FM-ALERT) Study Group. Central fetal monitoring with and without computer analysis: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;129(1):8390. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001799.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gracia-Perez-Bonfils, A, Chandraharan, E. Fetal oxygenation. In Chandraharan, E (ed.), Handbook of CTG Interpretation: From Patterns to Physiology, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2017, 612.Google Scholar
Chandraharan, E, Evans, A, Krueger, D, Pereira, S, Skivens, S, et al. Intrapartum fetal monitoring guideline. 2018. Scholar
Ayres-de-Campos, D, Spong, CY, Chandraharan, E. FIGO Intrapartum Fetal Monitoring Expert Consensus Panel. FIGO consensus guidelines on intrapartum fetal monitoring: cardiotocography. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2015;131(1):1324. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2015.06.020.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gracia-Perez-Bonfils, A, Vigneswaran, K, Cuadras, D, Chandraharan, E. Does the saltatory pattern on cardiotocograph (CTG) trace really exist? The ZigZag pattern as an alternative definition and its correlation with perinatal outcomes. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019;13:19. DOI: 10.1080/14767058.2019.1686475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yanamandra, N, Chandraharan, E. Saltatory and sinusoidal fetal heart rate (FHR) patterns and significance of FHR ‘overshoots. Curr Womens Health Rev. 2013;9:175–82.Google Scholar
Preti, M, Chandraharan, E. Importance of fetal heart rate cycling during the interpretation of the cardiotocograph (CTG). 2018. Scholar
Gracia-Perez-Bonfils, A, Chandraharan, E. Physiology of fetal heart rate control and types of intrapartum hypoxia. In Chandraharan, E (ed), Handbook of CTG Interpretation. From Patterns to Physiology, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2017, 1325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayres-De-Campos, D, Spong, CY, Chandraharan, E. FIGO consensus guidelines on intrapartum fetal monitoring: cardiotocography. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2015;131(1):1324. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijgo.2015.06.020.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Peebles, DM, Spencer, JA, Edwards, AD, Wyatt, JS, Reynolds, EO, Cope, M DD. Relation between frequency of uterine contractions and human fetal cerebral oxygen saturation studied during labour by near infrared spectroscopy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1994;101(1):44–8.Google ScholarPubMed
Pereira, S, Chandraharan, E. Recognition of chronic hypoxia and pre-existing foetal injury on the cardiotocograph (CTG): urgent need to think beyond the guidelines. Porto Biomed J. 2017;2(4):124–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.pbj.2017.01.004.Google ScholarPubMed
Xie, W, Archer, A, Li, C, Cui, H, Chandraharan, E. Fetal heart rate changes observed on the CTG trace during instrumental vaginal delivery. J Matern Neonatal Med. 2017. DOI: 10.1080/14767058.2017.1373084.Google Scholar
Chandraharan, E, Arulkumaran, S. Female pelvis and details of operative delivery; shoulder dystocia and episiotomy. In Arulkumaran, S, Penna, LK, Basker, R (eds), Management of Labour. Orient Longman (India), 2005.Google Scholar
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Shoulder Dystocia. Green-top Guideline No. 42. London: RCOG, 2005.Google Scholar
Draycott, T, Winter, C, Crofts, J, Barnfield, S (eds). PROMPT. Practical Obstetric Multiprofessional Training: Course Manual. London: RCOG, 2008.Google Scholar
Poujade, O, Azria, E, Ceccaldi, PF, Davitian, C, Khater, C, Chatel, P, et al. Prevention of shoulder dystocia: a randomized controlled trial to evaluate an obstetric manoeuvre. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018;227:52–9.Google Scholar
Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists. Monochorionic Twin Pregnancy, Management. Green-top Guideline No 51. London: RCOG, 2008.Google Scholar
Chudleigh, T, Thilaganathan, B (eds). Obstetrics Ultrasound: How, When and Why. Edinburgh: Elsevier, Churchill Livingstone, 2004.Google Scholar
Howell, C, Grady, K, Cox, C. Managing Obstetric Emergencies and Trauma: The MOET Course Manual, 2nd ed. London: RCOG, 2007.Google Scholar
Webster, SNE, Loughney, AD. Internal podalic version and breech extraction. Obstet Gynaecol. 2011;13:714.Google Scholar
Barrett, JF, Hannah, ME, Hutton, EK, Willan, AR, Allen, AC, Armson, BA, et al.; Twin Birth Study Collaborative Group. A randomized trial of planned cesarean or vaginal delivery for twin pregnancy. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(14):1295–305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Korb, D, Deneux-Tharaux, C, Seco, A, Goffinet, F, Schmitz, T; JUmeaux MODe dʼAccouchement (JUMODA) study group and the Groupe de Recherche en Obstétrique et Gynécologie (GROG). Risk of severe acute maternal morbidity according to planned mode of delivery in twin pregnancies. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;132(3):647–55.Google ScholarPubMed
Shinar, S, Agrawal, S, Hasan, H, Berger, H. Trial of labor versus elective repeat cesarean delivery in twin pregnancies after a previous cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Birth. 2019;46:550–9. ScholarPubMed
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 17: Operative Vaginal Delivery. Washington, DC: ACOG, 2000.Google Scholar
Howell, C, Grady, K, Cox, C. Managing Obstetric Emergencies and Trauma: The MOET Course Manual, 2nd ed. London: RCOG, 2007.Google Scholar
Baskett, TF, Calder, AA, Arulkumaran, S. Assisted vaginal delivery. In Munro Kerr’s Operative Obstetrics, 11th ed. Edinburgh: Elsevier; 2007, 91125.Google Scholar
Chandraharan, E, Arulkumaran, S. Operative delivery, shoulder dystocia and episiotomy. In Arulkumaran, S, Penna, LK, Bhasker Rao, K (eds), The Management of Labour, 2nd ed. Orient Longman (India); 2006, 137–62.Google Scholar
Ramphul, M, Ooi, PV, Burke, G, Kennelly, MM, Said, SAT, Montgomery, AA, et al. Instrumental delivery and ultrasound: a multicentre randomised controlled trial of ultrasound assessment of the fetal head position versus standard care as an approach to prevent morbidity at instrumental delivery. BJOG. 2014;121:1029–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baskett, TF, Arulkumaran, S (eds). Assisted vaginal delivery. In Intrapartum Care for the MRCOG and Beyond. London: RCOG; 2002, 6374.Google Scholar
Ameh, C, Weeks, A. The role of instrumental vaginal delivery in low resource settings. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2009;116(Suppl. 1):22–5.Google ScholarPubMed
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Operative Vaginal Delivery. Green-top Guideline No. 26. London: RCOG; 2011.Google Scholar
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Classification of Urgency of CS: A Continuum of Risk. RCOG Good Practice Guideline Number 11; 2010. Scholar
Betran, AP, Torloni, M, Zhang, J, et al. WHO statement on Caesarean section rates. BJOG. 2016;123(5):667–70.Google ScholarPubMed
Betran, AP, Torloni, M, Zhang, J, et al. What is the optimal rate of caesarean section at population level? A systematic review of ecologic studies. Reprod Health. 2015;21;1257.Google Scholar
Macfarlan, A, Blondel, B, Mohangoo, A, et al. Wide differences in mode of delivery within Europe: risk stratified analyses of aggregated routine data from the Euro-Peristat study. BJOG. 2016;123(4):559–68.Google Scholar
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Caesarean Section Consent Advice number 7. London: RCOG; 2009. Scholar
Thomas, J, Paranjothy, S. The National Sentinel Caesarean Section Audit Report. RCOG Clinical Effectiveness Support Unit. RCOG Press; 2001.–audit/nscs_audit.pdfGoogle Scholar
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Obtaining Valid Consent. Clinical Governance Advice No 6. London: RCOG; 2015. Scholar
Baskett, TF. Preparedness for emergency ‘crash’ caesarean section. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2015;37(12):1116–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
SGOC Clinical Practice Guideline. Surgical safety checklist in obstetrics and gynaecology. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2012;35(1 eSuppl B):S1S5. Scholar
National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health. Caesarean Section. Clinical Guideline. London: RCOG Press; 2011.–184810861Google Scholar
Jeejeebhoy, FM, Zelop, CM, Lipman, S, et al. Cardiac arrest in pregnancy: a scientific statement from the AHA. Circulation. 2015;132:1747–73. Scholar
Abalos, E. Surgical techniques for caesarean section: RHL commentary. The WHO Reproductive Health Library. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2009.Google Scholar
WHO recommendation on routine antibiotic prophylaxis for women undergoing elective or emergency caesarean section (September 2015). The WHO Reproductive Health Library. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
Health and Social Care Information Centre. Hospital Episodes Statistics, Maternity Data 2009–10. www.hesonline.nhs.ukGoogle Scholar
van Ham, M, van Dongen, PWJ, Mulder, J. Maternal consequences of caesarean section. A retrospective study of intra-operative and postoperative maternal complications of caesarean section during a 10-year period. Eur J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;74(1):16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bragg, F, Cromwell, DA, Edozien, LC, et al. Variation in rates of caesarean section among English NHS trusts after accounting for maternal and clinical risk: cross sectional study. Br Med J. 2010;341:c5065.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chandraharan, E, Arulkumaran, S. Acute tocolysis. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2005;17:151–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mishra, N, Chandraharan, E. Postpartum haemorrhage. In Warren, R, Arulkumaran, S (eds.), Best Practice in Labour and Delivery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2008, 160–70.Google Scholar
Chandraharan, E, Arulkumaran, S. Surgical aspects of postpartum haemorrhage. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2008;22(6):1089–102.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaluarachchi, A, Krishnamurthy, S. Post-cesarean section splenic rupture. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995;173(1):230–2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Celik, S, Celik, H, Soyer Calıskan, C, Tosun, M, Hatirnaz, S. Bladder filling before accreta surgery is a very effective method for preventing bladder injury: a retrospective cohort study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019:16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abu-Ghazza, O, Hayes, K, Chandraharan, E, Belli, AM. Gynaecology: diagnosis and treatment. Obstetric Gynaecol. 2010;12:8793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Centre for Maternal and Child Enquiries (CMACE). Saving Mothers’ Lives: Reviewing Maternal Deaths to make Motherhood Safer – 2006–2008. The Eighth Report on Confidential Enquiries into Maternal Deaths in the United Kingdom. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2011;118(Suppl. 1):1208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franchi, M, Raffaelli, R, Baggio, S, Scollo, M, Garzon, S, Laganà, AS, Casarin, J, Zanconato, G, Cromi, A, Ghezzi, F. Unintentional transvesical caesarean section: incidence, risk factors, surgical technique and post-operative management. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2019;236:2631.Google ScholarPubMed
NICE. Intrapartum Care for Healthy Women and Babies. Guidance and Guidelines. Scholar
NPEU. Birthplace in England Research Programme. Scholar
Blix, E, Huitfeldt, AS, Øian, P, Straume, B, Kumle, M. Outcomes of planned home births and planned hospital births in low-risk women in Norway between 1990 and 2007: a retrospective cohort study. Sex Reprod Healthcare. 2012;3(4):147–53. ScholarPubMed
National Maternity Review. Better Births: Improving outcomes of maternity services in England: A five year forward view for maternity care. 2015. Scholar
Knight, M. The findings of the MBRRACE-UK confidential enquiry into Maternal Deaths and Morbidity. Obstet Gynaecol Reprod Med. 2018. Scholar
Chandraharan, E, Krishna, A. Diagnosis and management of postpartum haemorrhage. BMJ. 2017;358:j3875. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.j3875. PMID: 28954732.Google ScholarPubMed
Al-Zirqi, I, Vangen, S, Forsen, L, Stray-Pedersen, B. Prevalence and risk factors of severe obstetric haemorrhage. 2008;115(10):1265–72.–0528.2008.01859.xGoogle ScholarPubMed
McDonald, SJ. Prophylactic ergometrine-oxytocin versus oxytocin for the third stage of labour. Scholar
Crofts, JF, Fox, R, Ellis, D, Winter, C, Hinshaw, K, Draycott, TJ. Observations from 450 shoulder dystocia simulations. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;112(4):906–12. ScholarPubMed
Mehta, SH, Sokol, RJ. Shoulder dystocia: risk factors, predictability, and preventability. Semin Perinatol. 2014;38(4):189–93. ScholarPubMed
Leung, T, Stuart, O, Sahota, D, Suen, S, Lau, T, Lao, T. Head-to-body delivery interval and risk of fetal acidosis and hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy in shoulder dystocia: a retrospective review. 2011;118(4):474–9.–0528.2010.02834.xGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoffman, MK, Bailit, JL, Branch, DW, Burkman, RT, Van Veldhusien, P, Lu, L, et al. A comparison of obstetric maneuvers for the acute management of shoulder dystocia. Obstet Anesth Dig. 2012;32(2):119–20. Scholar
Draycott, T, Sanders, C, Crofts, J, Lloyd, J. A template for reviewing the strength of evidence for obstetric brachial plexus injury in clinical negligence claims. Clin Risk. 2008;14(3):96100. Scholar
NICE. Intrapartum Care. Guidance and Guidelines. Scholar
Sagi-Dain, L, Sagi, S. The role of episiotomy in prevention and management of shoulder dystocia. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2015;70(5):354–62. ScholarPubMed
Reitter, A, Daviss, B-A, Bisits, A, Schollenberger, A, Vogl, T, Herrmann, E, et al. Does pregnancy and/or shifting positions create more room in a woman’s pelvis? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;211(6):662.e1-9. ScholarPubMed
Payne, J, Cox, J. Prolapsed cord. 2015. Scholar
Chebsey, C, Siassakos, D, Draycott, T. A review of umbilical cord prolapse and the influence of training on management. Fet. Matern. Med. Rev. 2012;23(02):120–3. Scholar
Sayed Ahmed, W, Hamdy, M. Optimal management of umbilical cord prolapse. IJWH. 2019;10:459–65. Scholar
Soar, J, Deakin, CD, Nolan, JP, Abbas, G, Alfonzo, A, Handley, AJ, et al. European Resuscitation Council Guidelines for Resuscitation 2005. Resuscitation. 2005;67:S135S170. ScholarPubMed
Hannah, ME, Hannah, WJ, Hewson, SA, Hodnett, ED, Saigal, S, Willan, AR. Planned caesarean section versus planned vaginal birth for breech presentation at term: a randomised multicentre trial. Lancet. 2000;356(9239):1375–83.–3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, S, Parker, P, Scamell, M. Expertise in physiological breech birth: a mixed-methods study. Birth. 2018;45(2):202–9. ScholarPubMed
Impey, LWM, Murphy, DJ, Griffiths, M, Penna, LK on behalf of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Management of breech presentation. BJOG. 2017;124:e151e177. Scholar
Louwen, F, Daviss, B-A, Johnson, KC, Reitter, A. Does breech delivery in an upright position instead of on the back improve outcomes and avoid cesareans? Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2017;136(2):151–6. Scholar
Bisits, A. There is a place in current obstetric practice for planned vaginal breech birth. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2017;57(3):372–4. ScholarPubMed
Winter, C. PROMPT Course Manual. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.Google Scholar
Walker, S, Scamell, M, Parker, P. Deliberate acquisition of competence in physiological breech birth: a grounded theory study. Women Birth. 2018;31(3):e170e177. ScholarPubMed
Walker, S, Scamell, M, Parker, P. Principles of physiological breech birth practice: a Delphi study. Midwifery. 2016;43:1–6. : ScholarPubMed
Bogner, G, Strobl, M, Schausberger, C, Fischer, T, Reisenberger, K, Jacobs, VR. Breech delivery in the all fours position: a prospective observational comparative study with classic assistance. J Perinat Med. 2015;43(6):707–13. DOI: 10.1515/jpm-2014-0048. PMID: 25204214.Google ScholarPubMed
Mechanisms of upright breech birth. Vimeo; Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure 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 or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ 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