Of the 514 dystocia cases, 264 (51%) were managed by midwives alone, 66 (13%) by an obstetrician assisting a midwife, and 183 (36%) by an obstetrician conducting an instrumental delivery; there was a slight increase in obstetrician involvement of 1.5% per year (P=.033). The proportion of cases with consultant obstetric involvement increased from 5 of 169 (3%) during the first 5 years to 12 of 209 (6%) during the last 5 years. Table 2 lists the procedures used and the order in which they were used when more than one maneuver was used to overcome the obstruction; the fetal head–trunk delivery interval was recorded in 293 (57%) cases and these have also been analyzed in the table. There was a significant increase in birth weight with the need for additional procedures to complete the delivery (average 73 g increase per procedure; 95% CI 28.6–117.8 g, P=.001). The McRoberts’ maneuver was used at some stage in the management of 270 deliveries; it was used for 5 of 163 (3%) cases during 1991 to 1995, 72 of 140 (51%) cases during 1996 to 2000, and 193 of 211 (91%) cases during 2001 to 2005, an obvious increase over time (P<.001). When it was the first procedure used to overcome the obstruction, it was successful in 105 of 231 (45%) cases.
Seventy-five (14%) women sustained a primary postpartum hemorrhage, 67% of whom underwent an instrumental delivery, and the same proportion delivered using an episiotomy; the frequency of primary postpartum hemorrhage did not change over time. An episiotomy was made for 282 (55%) deliveries with no information available for one delivery. There was a decrease in episiotomies of 3.8% per year during the study period (2.0%, 95% CI 5–6%, P=.001) but no change in the numbers of women with intact perineum (P=.9). Third- or fourth-degree tears were sustained in 29 (6%) cases, 13 with an episiotomy and 16 without an episiotomy (P=.26). Seventeen cases occurred after 182 (9%) instrumental deliveries, and 12 occurred after 328 (4%) spontaneous deliveries (P=.009). The perineum remained intact in 74 of the 231 (32%) cases where an episiotomy had not been made. Five women had perineal complications: three had a vulvovaginal hematoma, one had a vulval infection, and one required perineal resuturing.
Fifty-nine of 514 (11%) neonates experienced serious neonatal morbidity after shoulder dystocia, and one neonate suffered a brachial plexus injury after delivery by cesarean. Brachial plexus injury was diagnosed in 44 (8.3%) (1:1821 vaginal deliveries and 1:12 cases of shoulder dystocia), 11 neonates suffered a fracture, and eight required cardiac massage at delivery or developed hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy. Neonates experiencing severe hypoxia did not have any other injuries, whereas four with a brachial plexus injury also suffered a fracture. Serious neonatal morbidity occurred in 35 among 270 (13%) neonates delivered using the McRoberts’ maneuver compared with 24 among 245 (10%) delivered without the McRoberts’ maneuver experienced serious neonatal morbidity (P=.27). Table 2 lists the frequency of brachial plexus injury and acidosis at delivery according to the number of procedures needed to overcome the obstruction to delivery.
Of the 44 brachial plexus injuries, 43 were Erb’s palsy and one Klumpke’s palsy. Three neonates suffered a transient facial palsy, one of whom also had an Erb’s palsy. As shown in Figure 2, the rate of brachial plexus injury rose over time, increasing at a rate of 0.06 per 1,000 vaginal births per year (P=.007). The rate of brachial plexus injury to neonates with shoulder dystocia increased over time by 0.41% per year (P=.027). Nineteen (43%) of the 44 cases occurred after a spontaneous delivery, with obstetric assistance required for eight (42%) of them. The remaining 25 cases were instrumental deliveries managed by senior obstetricians, of which three were by consultants (Table 3). The McRoberts’ maneuver was not used for the delivery for any of the 11 cases (0%) delivered during 1991–1995, eight of 13 cases (61%) during 1996–2000 and 19 of 20 cases (95%) during 2001–2005; the case record for one case delivered in 1993 was not available for examination. Of the fractures, five were clavicular (two of whom had an Erb’s palsy), five humeral (two of whom had an Erb’s palsy), and one experienced a rib fracture. In eight of these cases, the McRoberts’ maneuver was used, in two it was not, and for one case the case records were not available. In four of the five cases of humeral fracture, the posterior arm was manipulated to overcome the obstruction, and an episiotomy was made in three of these four cases.
Thirty-six (7%) neonates showed evidence of acidosis at delivery: 28 had acidotic cord gases, and 8, without paired cord blood gas measurements, had a 1-minute Apgar score of 3 or less. Five of these 36 required external cardiac massage, and four developed hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy. Two neonates, one delivered in 1993 and the other in 2003, developed cerebral palsy and died in early childhood. Three of the acidotic neonates also suffered a brachial plexus injury. The McRoberts’ maneuver was used to overcome shoulder dystocia in 18 (45%) of these 36 cases; in five cases, no specific procedures were used, and none sustained a brachial plexus injury, but one neonate required external cardiac massage. Twenty-seven of these 36 (68%) weighed 4.0 kg or more and 13 (33%) weighed 4.5 kg or more. In 26 instances, the head–trunk interval was recorded, and the median interval was 5 minutes, ranging between 1 and 14 minutes; in 15 (60%), the interval was 4 minutes or longer. The median interval was 3 minutes 30 seconds (range 1–6 minutes) for the 22 delivered with the assistance of an episiotomy compared with 6 minutes (range 1–10 minutes) for the seven without the aid of an episiotomy (P=.21). The head–body interval for the two neonates that died in infancy was 5 and 7 minutes, respectively. Interrogation of the 4Child database of children with impairment did not identify any additional cases of impairment.
One hundred twenty-six women have had at least one subsequent delivery, and Figure 3 illustrates the relationship between the index and subsequent birth weight; 32% neonates weighed more than the indexed neonate. Thirty-six (29%) subsequent deliveries were managed by antepartum cesarean delivery, and 12 (33%) of these neonates were heavier than the index neonate. Of the 90 who labored, 32 (35%) had labor induced, 15 before 40 weeks of gestation, with 29 delivering vaginally, and 60 (65%) spontaneously labored, with 58 delivering vaginally. Six (20%) of the neonates delivered after labor induction and 23 (40%) of the neonates delivered after spontaneous labor onset were heavier than the previous siblings. Five women who labored were delivered by intrapartum cesarean and two (20%) of these neonates were heavier than the index neonate.
Nine of the 87 (10%) women who delivered vaginally a second time had repeat shoulder dystocia and thus appear twice in the original database; in eight cases this occurred with the next confinement, and in one instance it occurred during the third confinement after the index delivery. Six of the cases occurred after spontaneous labor onset, five occurred during an instrumental delivery, and the birth weight of each of these neonates was heavier than the index pregnancy birth weight, except for the case that occurred after two interim trouble-free deliveries. Of the nine women whose previous neonates had sustained a brachial plexus injury and who have delivered another neonate, seven were delivered by planned antepartum cesarean, and two delivered vaginally; both of these latter two neonates were larger than the index neonate, and shoulder dystocia occurred again with one neonate experiencing a transient brachial plexus injury similar to his sibling.
The overall rate of shoulder dystocia in our study was 0.6%, which is comparable to the rate reported in other studies also involving relatively large numbers.11–14 However, we observed a significant increasing trend at the rate of 0.03% per year during the study period. The characteristics of the cases of shoulder dystocia were consistent with those reported in many other previous studies (increased frequencies in multiparas, prolonged first or second stages of labor, after instrumental vaginal deliveries, high birth weight neonates, and women with high BMI)15–19 The distribution of birth weight for the population studied with 11% neonates weighing 4.0 kg or more is the same as that reported by a national survey conducted in the United Kingdom during 2000–2001.20 There was, however, no increase in the rates of these risk characteristics in the base population during the study period, which leads us to conclude that the increased rate of shoulder dystocia is possibly the result of an increase in diagnosis due to an increased awareness, stimulated by the training workshops for dealing with shoulder dystocia. An increase in rate from 0.2% in 1979 to 2.1% in 2003, or 1:200 to 1:50 vaginal deliveries, was noted in Maryland.21 Despite our tentative explanation, there was a significant increase in the rate of brachial plexus injuries over the same period from 1:20 to 1:10 cases of shoulder dystocia. Two studies from the West Midlands in the United Kingdom have suggested an increase in the rate of brachial plexus injury after shoulder dystocia from 1:77 in the early 1990s to 1:4 in 2003.22,23
The ways in which shoulder dystocia was managed changed considerably during the study period with use of the McRoberts’ maneuver, which was rarely used during the first 5 years, increasing to 91% of cases during the last 5 years. A 46% successful outcome when the McRoberts’ maneuver was used as the first procedure is similar to the 40% and 42% reported by others.24,25 Its use, therefore, does not guarantee a successful outcome, and this should be acknowledged by those expressing opinions in medico–legal matters.26 The finding of a significant direct association between fetal weight and the need for additional procedures to complete the delivery has also been observed by others.22 What was surprising, however, was the lack of effect on the rate of brachial plexus injuries, with 19 of the 20 cases of brachial plexus injury encountered since 2001 being managed with the McRoberts’ maneuver, compared with only eight of 13 before 2001. Thus, despite the dramatic increased use of the McRoberts’ maneuver, the incidence of brachial plexus injury has not fallen. Although it might be argued that this lack of decrease was because the maneuver was not correctly applied, the rates of brachial plexus injuries after all vaginal deliveries (1:1803) and after shoulder dystocia (1:12) in our study are no higher than the range 1:448–1,708 for all deliveries and 1:4–12 for vaginal deliveries reported in many studies involving large patient numbers in recent years.24,25,27–29 This increase is even more surprising considering the 50% increase in cesarean deliveries during the study period from 12% in 1991 to 21% in 2005 and the unchanging birth weight statistics over the same period. The report published in 1998 examining the incidence and causes of brachial plexus injuries in the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland17 concluded that there had been no significant change in the incidence of brachial plexus palsy over the preceding 40 years, although the methods used to overcome shoulder dystocia were not investigated in that study. Analyses of results published by different units to examine possible trends over different time periods may not provide sufficiently reliable data from which to draw conclusions, but our study has shown that the introduction of the McRoberts’ maneuver has not improved the chance of overcoming shoulder dystocia or reduced the risks of brachial plexus injury.
As many previous studies have shown, there is an increased risk of significant maternal trauma with shoulder dystocia, with a twofold to threefold increase in primary postpartum hemorrhage similar to that reported by others.24,30 The rate of third- and fourth-degree perineal tears at 7% is approximately double that commonly reported for all vaginal deliveries,31,32 and although these tears occurred more commonly when an episiotomy had not been made, the results do not support the minority view that an episiotomy should invariably be made to overcome shoulder dystocia. In addition, an episiotomy did not reduce neonatal morbidity or shorten head–body intervals.
Acidosis accompanied 7% of deliveries, and 1.5% neonates experienced some hypoxic consequences. The frequency with which hypoxia occurs during deliveries complicated by shoulder dystocia has not been thoroughly addressed in the literature. However, although considered by Nesbitt et al,33 who observed an increase in asphyxiated neonates born after shoulder dystocia compared with the general population, a definition for asphyxia was not provided. We are not aware of any previous studies that have attempted to follow up neonates born after shoulder dystocia and address the potential long-term effect of the hypoxia that many neonates experience during delivery. There were only two cases in our study where permanent cerebral damage was detected, and both neonates died in early childhood. We recognize that the three neonates born during 2004 to 2005 with hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy during the neonatal period could yet appear on the 4Child register, because cerebral palsy is diagnosed over time, and the ascertainment process continues until the age of 5 years. The mortality rate we have observed is, however. broadly consistent with that reported following the Confidential Enquiry into Stillbirths and Deaths in Infancy in England, Wales and Northern Ireland34; in that analysis, there were 56 deaths among 1,367,851 births (1:24,000 births), compared with the two deaths among 95,321 births (1:47,000 births) in our study. The Confidential Enquiry into Stillbirths and Deaths in Infancy study found that the head–body interval was less than 5 minutes in just under one half of the deaths and less than 10 minutes in 80%. The two fatalities in our study are compatible with the Confidential Enquiry into Stillbirths and Deaths in Infancy observations. The clinician has to balance delivery avoiding mechanical trauma with speed to reduce the risk of hypoxic damage. That only three of the 44 neonates with a brachial plexus injury were acidotic at birth suggests that mechanical injuries can occur early during delivery complicated by shoulder dystocia.
The strategy for managing the next delivery after shoulder dystocia is debated. A cautious approach, planning delivery before the due date, is often adopted as with the 61% antepartum cesarean delivery or labor inductions in our study. Whether this approach is justified has been challenged.35,36 It is of note, however, that approximately one third of neonates delivered subsequent to the shoulder dystocia were heavier, a proportion that hardly varied between the timed deliveries and those after planned spontaneous onset labor. The 11% recurrence rate of shoulder dystocia in those who subsequently labored and delivered vaginally is similar to the 10–16% reported by other groups,37–39 although it is much greater than the 1% among 93 subsequent vaginal deliveries reported by Baskett and Allen,27 who observed 41% of neonates were heavier than the previous neonate delivered with shoulder dystocia. As anticipated, in virtually all cases of repeat shoulder dystocia in our study, the second neonate was heavier than the first and it is frustrating to acknowledge that there are still no reliable predictors for calculating birth weight using clinical assessment or ultrasound biometry.40–42 In these circumstances, it is difficult to argue against adopting a conservative approach and encouraging future deliveries by cesarean while cautioning against the risk of recurrent shoulder dystocia with another labor and vaginal delivery.
Our results show that despite an increase in cesarean deliveries, there was an increase in the rates of shoulder dystocia and brachial plexus injuries, the latter occurring despite the almost universal adoption of the McRoberts’ maneuver during the last 5 years of the study. Although most of the literature relating to shoulder dystocia has concentrated on preventing injuries to the brachial plexus, the threat of hypoxia deserves greater attention, together with further research into its potential long-term consequences. The increasing rates of both shoulder dystocia and brachial plexus injuries are difficult to explain but are a concern. Although factors associated with an increased risk of shoulder dystocia are well recognized, our ability to predict these cases remains limited, as do reliable predictions of fetal weight.
1. ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins-Gynecology, The American College of Obstetrician and Gynecologists. ACOG practice bulletin clinical management guidelines for obstetrician–gynecologists. Number 40, November 2002. Obstet Gynecol 2002;100:1045–50.
3. Baxley EG, Gobbo RW. Shoulder dystocia. Am Fam Physician 2004;69:1707–14
4. Johanson R, Cox C, Grady K, Howell C, editors. Managing obstetric emergencies and trauma. London (UK): RCOG Press; 2003.
5. Gonik B, Stringer CA, Held B. An alternate maneuver for management of shoulder dystocia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1983;145:882–4.
6. Yudkin P, Redman CW. Obstetric audit using routinely collected computerised data. BMJ 1990;301:1371–3.
7. Dennis J, Johnson A, Mutch L, Yudkin P, Johnson P. Acid-base status at birth and neurodevelopmental outcome at four and one-half years. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1989;161:213–20.
8. American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists. Fetal distress and birth asphyxia. ACOG Committee Opinion 137. Washington (DC): ACOG; 1994.
9. Johnson A, King R. A regional register of early childhood impairments: discussion paper. The Steering Committee of the Oxford Region Child Development Project. Community Med 1989;11:352–63.
10. National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit. 4Child. Four counties database of cerebral palsy, vision loss and hearing loss in children. Available at: www.npeu.ox.ac.uk/4Child
. Retrieved August 29, 2007.
11. Levine MG, Holroyde J, Woods JR Jr, Siddiqi TA, Scott M, Miodovnik M. Birth trauma: incidence and predisposing factors. Obstet Gynecol 1984;63:792–5.
12. Hopwood HG Jr. Shoulder dystocia: fifteen years’ experience in a community hospital. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1982;144:162–6.
13. Ouzounian JG, Gherman RB. Shoulder dystocia: are historic risk factors reliable predictors? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005;192:1933–5.
14. Gilbert WM, Nesbitt TS, Danielsen B. Associated factors in 1611 cases of brachial plexus injury. Obstet Gynecol 1999;93:536–40.
15. Chauhan SP, Grobman WA, Gherman RA, Chauhan VB, Chang G, Magann EF, et al. Suspicion and treatment of the macrosomic fetus: a review. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005;193:332–46.
16. Stallings SP, Edwards RK, Johnson JW. Correlation of head-to-body delivery intervals in shoulder dystocia and umbilical artery acidosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;185:268–74.
17. Evans-Jones G, Kay SP, Weindling AM, Cranny G, Ward A, Bradshaw A, et al. Congenital brachial palsy: incidence, causes, and outcome in the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 2003;88:F185–9.
18. Athukorala C, Crowther CA, Willson K, Australian Carbohydrate Intolerance Study in Pregnant Women (ACHOIS) Trial Group. Women with gestational diabetes mellitus in the ACHOIS trial: risk factors for shoulder dystocia. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2007;47:37–41.
19. Belfort MA, Dildy GA, Saade GR, Suarez V, Clark SL. Prediction of shoulder dystocia using multivariate analysis. Am J Perinatol 2007;24:5–10.
20. Thomas J, Paranjothy S, Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Clinical Effectiveness Support Unit. The national sentinel caesarean section audit report. London (UK): RCOG Press; 2001.
21. Dandolu V, Lawrence L, Gaughan JP, Grotegut C, Harmanli OH, Jaspan D, et al. Trends in the rate of shoulder dystocia over two decades. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2005;18:305–10.
22. Olugbile A, Mascarenhas L. Review of shoulder dystocia at the Birmingham Women’s Hospital. J Obstet Gynaecol 2000;20:267–70.
23. Heazell AE, Judge JK, Bhatti NR. A retrospective study to determine if umbilical cord pH correlates with duration of delay between delivery of the head and body in shoulder dystocia. J Obstet Gynaecol 2004;24:776–7.
24. Gherman RB, Goodwin TM, Souter I, Neumann K, Ouzounian JG, Paul RH. The McRoberts’ maneuver for the alleviation of shoulder dystocia: how successful is it? Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997;176:656–61.
25. McFarland MB, Langer O, Piper JM, Berkus MD. Perinatal outcome and the type and number of maneuvers in shoulder dystocia. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 1996;55:219–24.
26. Johnson A. Obstetric brachial plexus palsy: the medico-legal view. Obstet Gynaecol (Lond) 2006;7:259–65.
27. Baskett TF, Allen AC. Perinatal implications of shoulder dystocia. Obstet Gynecol 1995;86:14–7.
28. Chauhan SP, Rose CH, Gherman RB, Magann EF, Holland MW, Morrison JC. Brachial plexus injury: a 23-year experience from a tertiary center. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005;192:1795–800.
29. Nocon JJ, McKenzie DK, Thomas LJ, Hansell RS. Shoulder dystocia: an analysis of risks and obstetric maneuvers. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993;168:1732–7.
30. Roungsipragarn R, Herabutya Y. Shoulder dystocia: fifteen years’ experience in Ramathibodi Hospital. J Med Assoc Thai 1998;81:821–3.
31. Christianson LM, Bovbjerg VE, McDavitt EC, Hullfish KL. Risk factors for perineal injury during delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;189:255–60.
32. de Leeuw JW, Struijk PC, Vierhout ME, Wallenburg HC. Risk factors for third degree perineal ruptures during delivery. BJOG 2001;108:383–7.
33. Nesbitt TS, Gilbert WM, Herrchen B. Shoulder dystocia and associated risk factors with macrosomic infants born in California. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1998;179:476–80.
34. Hope P, Breslin S, Lamont L, Lucas A, Martin D, Moore I, et al. Fatal shoulder dystocia: a review of 56 cases reported to the Confidential Enquiry into Stillbirths and Deaths in Infancy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105:1256–61.
35. Irion O, Boulvain M. Induction of labour for suspected fetal macrosomia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000;(2):CD000938.
36. Sanchez-Ramos L, Bernstein S, Kaunitz AM. Expectant management versus labor induction for suspected fetal macrosomia: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol 2002;100:997–1002.
37. Smith RB, Lane C, Pearson JF. Shoulder dystocia: what happens at the next delivery? Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1994;101:713–5.
38. Ginsberg NA, Moisidis C. How to predict recurrent shoulder dystocia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001;184:1427–9.
39. Lewis DF, Raymond RC, Perkins MB, Brooks GG, Heymann AR. Recurrence rate of shoulder dystocia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995;172:1369–71.
40. Menjou M, Mottram J, Petts C, Stoner R. Common intrapartum denominators of obstetric brachial plexus injury (OBPI). NHSLA J 2003;2 suppl:ii–viii.
41. Johnstone FD, Prescott RJ, Steel JM, Mao JH, Chambers S, Muir N. Clinical and ultrasound prediction of macrosomia in diabetic pregnancy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1996;103:747–54.
© 2007 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
42. Chauhan SP, Lynn NN, Sanderson M, Humphries J, Cole JH, Scardo JA. A scoring system for detection of macrosomia and prediction of shoulder dystocia: a disappointment. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2006;19:699–705.