Abstract
Introduction: We conducted a randomized study to determine whether a training session on a dedicated simulator (IUSim™) would facilitate the midwives in learning the technique of transperineal intrapartum ultrasound. Methods: Following a 30-min multimedia presentation including images and videos on how to obtain and measure the angle of progression (AoP) and the head-perineum distance (HPD), 6 midwives with no prior experience in intrapartum ultrasound were randomly split into 2 groups: 3 of them were assigned to the “training group” and 3 to the “control group.” The midwives belonging to the former group were taught to measure the 2 sonographic parameters during a 3-h practical session conducted on IUSim™ under the supervision of an expert obstetrician. In the following 3 months, all the 6 midwives were asked to independently perform transperineal ultrasound during their clinical practice and to measure on the acquired images either the AoP or the HPD. The sonographic images were examined in blind by the teaching obstetrician who assigned a 0–3 score to the image quality (IQS) and to the measurement quality (MQS). Results: A total of 48 ultrasound images (24 patients) from 5 midwives were acquired and included in the study analysis. A midwife of the “training group” declined participation after the practical session. Independently from the randomization group, the image quality score (IQS + MQS) was significantly higher for the HPD compared with the AoP (2.5 ± 0.66 vs. 1.79 ± 1.14; p = 0.01). In the training group, the MQS of either AoP (2.66 ± 0.5 vs.1.46 ± 1.45. p = 0.038) and the HPD (2.9 ± 0.33 vs. 1.87 ± 0.83 p = 0.002) was significantly higher in comparison with the control group, while the IQS of both measurements was comparable between the 2 groups (1.91 ± 1.24 vs. 2.25 ± 0.865; p = 0.28). Conclusion: The use of a dedicated simulator may facilitate the midwives in learning how to measure the AoP and the HPD on transperineal ultrasound images.
Journal Section:
Editor's choice
References
1.
Ghi
T
, Eggebø
T
, Lees
C
, Kalache
K
, Rozenberg
P
, Youssef
A
, . ISUOG practice guidelines: intrapartum ultrasound
. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
. 2018
;52
(1
):128
–39
.2.
Tutschek
B
, Braun
T
, Chantraine
F
, Henrich
W
. A study of progress of labour using intrapartum translabial ultrasound, assessing head station, direction, and angle of descent
. BJOG
. 2011
;118
(1
):62
–9
.3.
Eggebø
TM
, Wilhelm-Benartzi
C
, Hassan
WA
, Usman
S
, Salvesen
KA
, Lees
CC
. A model to predict vaginal delivery in nulliparous women based on maternal characteristics and intrapartum ultrasound
. Am J Obstet Gynecol
. 2015
;213
(3
):362
–6
.4.
Hassan
WA
, Eggebø
T
, Ferguson
M
, Gillett
A
, Studd
J
, Pasupathy
D
, . The sonopartogram: a novel method for recording progress of labor by ultrasound
. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
. 2014
;43
(2
):189
–94
.5.
Barbera
AF
, Pombar
X
, Perugino
G
, Lezotte
DC
, Hobbins
JC
. A new method to assess fetal head descent in labor with transperineal ultrasound
. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
. 2009
;33
(3
):313
–9
.6.
Iversen
JK
, Eggebø
TM
. Increased diagnostic accuracy of fetal head station by use of transabdominal ultrasound
. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand
. 2019
;98
(6
):805
–6
.7.
Sherer
DM
, Abulafia
O
. Intrapartum assessment of fetal head engagement: comparison between transvaginal digital and transabdominal ultrasound determinations
. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
. 2003
;21
(5
):430
–6
.8.
Dietz
HP
, Lanzarone
V
. Measuring engagement of the fetal head: validity and reproducibility of a new ultrasound technique
. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
. 2005
;25
(2
):165
–8
.9.
Ghi
T
, Farina
A
, Pedrazzi
A
, Rizzo
N
, Pelusi
G
, Pilu
G
. Diagnosis of station and rotation of the fetal head in the second stage of labor with intrapartum translabial ultrasound
. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
. 2009
;33
(3
):331
–6
.10.
Tutschek
B
, Torkildsen
EA
, Eggebø
TM
. Comparison between ultrasound parameters and clinical examination to assess fetal head station in labor
. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
. 2013
;41
(4
):425
–9
.11.
Rizzo
G
, Aloisio
F
, Bacigalupi
A
, Mappa
I
, Slodki
M
, Makatsarya
A
, . Women’s compliance with ultrasound in labor: a prospective observational study
. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med
. 2019
:1
–5
. published online ahead of print, 2019 Jul 8
.12.
Usman
S
, Barton
H
, Wilhelm-Benartzi
C
, Lees
CC
. Ultrasound is better tolerated than vaginal examination in and before labour
. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol
. 2019
;59
(3
):362
–6
.13.
Ghi
T
, Maroni
E
, Youssef
A
, Morselli-Labate
AM
, Paccapelo
A
, Montaguti
E
, . Sonographic pattern of fetal head descent: relationship with duration of active second stage of labor and occiput position at delivery
. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
. 2014
;44
(1
):82
–9
.14.
Bultez
T
, Quibel
T
, Bouhanna
P
, Popowski
T
, Resche‐Rigon
M
, Rozenberg
P
. Re: Angle of fetal head progression measured using transperineal ultrasound as a predictive factor of vacuum extraction failure
. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
. 2016
;48
(1
):26
–7
.15.
Sainz
JA
, García-Mejido
JA
, Aquise
A
, Bonomi
MJ
, Borrero
C
, De La Fuente
P
, . Intrapartum transperineal ultrasound used to predict cases of complicated operative (vacuum and forceps) deliveries in nulliparous women
. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand
. 2017
;96
(12
):1490
–7
.16.
Sainz
JA
, García-Mejido
JA
, Aquise
A
, Borrero
C
, Bonomi
MJ
, Fernández-Palacín
A
. A simple model to predict the complicated operative vaginal deliveries using vacuum or forceps
. Am J Obstet Gynecol
. 2019
;220
(2
):193
–e12
.17.
Masturzo
B
, De Ruvo
D
, Gaglioti
P
, Todros
T
. Ultrasound imaging in prolonged second stage of labor: does it reduce the operative delivery rate
. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med
. 2014
;27
(15
):1560
–3
.18.
Dall’Asta
A
, Angeli
L
, Masturzo
B
, Volpe
N
, Schera
GB
, Di Pasquo
E
, . Prediction of spontaneous vaginal delivery in nulliparous women with a prolonged second stage of labor: the value of intrapartum ultrasound
. Am J Obstet Gynecol
. 2019 Oct 4
;(19
):31211
–6
. pii: S0002-9378
.19.
Chan
VYT
, Lau
WL
, So
MKP
, Leung
WC
. Measuring angle of progression by transperineal ultrasonography to predict successful instrumental and cesarean deliveries during prolonged second stage of labor
. Int J Gynaecol Obstet
. 2019
;144
(2
):192
–8
.20.
Ghi
T
, Rizzo
G
; EGEO Group
. The use of a hybrid mannequin for the modern high-fidelity simulation in the labor ward: the Italian experience of the Ecografia Gestione Emergenze Ostetriche (EGEO) group
. Am J Obstet Gynecol
. 2020
;222
(1
):41
–7
.21.
Chalouhi
GE
, Bernardi
V
, Gueneuc
A
, Houssin
I
, Stirnemann
JJ
, Ville
Y
. Evaluation of trainees’ ability to perform obstetrical ultrasound using simulation: challenges and opportunities
. Am J Obstet Gynecol
. 2016
;214
(4
):525
–e8
.22.
Youssef
A
, Ghi
T
, Awad
EE
, Maroni
E
, Montaguti
E
, Rizzo
N
, . Ultrasound in labor: a caregiver’s perspective
. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
. 2013
;41
(4
):469
–70
.23.
Lewiss
RE
, Hoffmann
B
, Beaulieu
Y
, Phelan
MB
. Point-of-care ultrasound education: the increasing role of simulation and multimedia resources
. J Ultrasound Med
. 2014
;33
(1
):27
–32
.24.
Chalouhi
GE
, Bernardi
V
, Ville
Y
. Ultrasound simulators in obstetrics and gynecology: state of the art
. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
. 2015
;46
(3
):255
–63
.25.
Chalouhi
GE
, Quibel
T
, Lamourdedieu
C
, Hajal
NJ
, Gueneuc
A
, Benzina
N
, . La simulation pour améliorer l’apprentissage de l’échographie obstétricale chez les débutants : étude pilote et revue de la littérature [Obstetrical ultrasound simulator as a tool for improving teaching strategies for beginners: Pilot study and review of the literature]
. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod
. 2016
;45
(9
):1107
–14
.26.
Osborne
B
, Parange
N
, Thoirs
K
. The effectiveness of the use of high fidelity simulators in obstetric ultrasound training: a systematic review
. Australas J Ultrasound Med
. 2015
;18
(3
):107
–11
.27.
Gueneuc
A
, De Garnier
J
, Dommergues
M
, Rivière
M
, Ville
Y
, Chalouhi
GE
. [Impact of sonography simulation in the training of midwifery students]
. Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol
. 2019
;47
(11
):776
–82
.28.
Rosen
H
, Windrim
R
, Lee
YM
, Gotha
L
, Perelman
V
, Ronzoni
S
. Simulator based obstetric ultrasound training: a prospective, randomized single-blinded study
. J Obstet Gynaecol Can
. 2017
;39
(3
):166
–73
.29.
Youssef
A
, Kamel
R
. Ultrasound in labor: impact of a theoretical and practical course on caregiver’s perspective and accuracy
. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med
. 2019
:1
–7
. published online ahead of print, 2019 Jan 30
.30.
Dückelmann
AM
, Bamberg
C
, Michaelis
SA
, Lange
J
, Nonnenmacher
A
, Dudenhausen
JW
, . Measurement of fetal head descent using the ‘angle of progression’ on transperineal ultrasound imaging is reliable regardless of fetal head station or ultrasound expertise
. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
. 2010
;35
(2
):216
–22
.31.
Alexander
JM
, Mercer
BM
, Miodovnik
M
, Thurnau
GR
, Goldenberg
RL
, Das
AF
, . The impact of digital cervical examination on expectantly managed preterm rupture of membranes
. Am J Obstet Gynecol
. 2000
;183
(4
):1003
–7
.32.
Lewis
DF
, Major
CA
, Towers
CV
, Asrat
T
, Harding
JA
, Garite
TJ
. Effects of digital vaginal examinations on latency period in preterm premature rupture of membranes
. Obstet Gynecol
. 1992
;80
(4
):630
–4
.33.
Gilboa
Y
, Frenkel
TI
, Schlesinger
Y
, Rousseau
S
, Hamiel
D
, Achiron
R
, . Visual biofeedback using transperineal ultrasound in second stage of labor
. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
. 2018
;52
(1
):91
–6
.34.
Bellussi
F
, Alcamisi
L
, Guizzardi
G
, Parma
D
, Pilu
G
. Traditionally vs. sonographically coached pushing in second stage of labor: a pilot randomized controlled trial
. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol
. 2018
;52
(1
):87
–90
.© 2020 S. Karger AG, Basel
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
2020
You do not currently have access to this content.
