A continuing use for Kielland's forceps?
- 1 September 1984
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
- Vol. 91 (9), 894-898
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1984.tb03704.x
Abstract
A retrospective study over a 5 yr period compared neonatal outcomes after birth by Kielland''s forceps with those after cesarean section in the 2nd stage of labor. The 253 babies born by these 2 modes of delivery showed no difference in Apgar score, the need for active resuscitation, incidence of jaundice or abnormal neurological behavior. The neonatal outcome was no worse in the small number of patients where Kielland''s forceps delivery was attempted but failed. The continuing role of Kielland''s forceps in modern obstetrical practice is supported.This publication has 13 references indexed in Scilit:
- Kielland or Caesar?BMJ, 1983
- Kielland or Caesar?BMJ, 1983
- Should we abandon Kielland's forceps?BMJ, 1983
- Delayed pushing with lumbar epidural analgesia in labourBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1983
- Epidural analgesia and assisted deliveryBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1983
- Rotational delivery of the fetus: Kielland's forceps and two other methods comparedBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1982
- TRAUMATIC INTRACRANIAL HAEMORRHAGE IN FIRSTBORN INFANTS AND DELIVERY WITH OBSTETRIC FORCEPSBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1981
- Why blame the obstetrician? A review.BMJ, 1979
- Lumbar epidural analgesia in labour: relation to fetal malposition and instrumental delivery.BMJ, 1977
- Midforceps delivery—a vanishing art?American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1963