New design rigid and soft vacuum extractor cups: a preliminary comparison of traction forces
- 22 August 1990
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
- Vol. 97 (8), 681-685
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1990.tb16238.x
Abstract
Summary. Women due for vacuum extraction were randomly allocated to delivery using one of two soft cups (Silc or Silastic) or two new design rigid cups (New Bird or O'Neil). Traction forces were recorded continuously and higher values were reached with the rigid than the soft cups (median 15.8, range 7.5.19.7 vs 11.1, 7.2.15.1 kg, P < 0.01). Selection of the most appropriate vacuum cup for each clinical situation should take into account that the flexible cups are associated with less cosmetic disfigurcment but have a lower capacity for traction.This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- A multicentre randomized trial comparing delivery with a silicone rubber cup and rigid metal vacuum extractor cupsBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1989
- North Staffordshire/Wigan assisted delivery trialBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1989
- LABORATORY COMPARISON OF MODERN VACUUM EXTRACTORS1988
- A randomized study of two cups for vacuum extractionjpme, 1987
- Comparison Between the Conventional Malmström Extractor and a New Extractor with Silastic CupActa Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 1986
- Follow Up of Babies Delivered in a Randomized Controlled Comparison of Vacuum Extraction and Forceps DeliveryActa Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 1986
- Vacuum extraction or forceps?BMJ, 1986
- Vacuum extraction: a randomized controlled comparison of the New Generation cup with the original BIRD cupjpme, 1986
- Portsmouth operative delivery trial: a comparison vacuum extraction and forceps deliveryBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1983
- Forceps and Vacuum ExtractionClinics in Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1980