Instrumental vaginal delivery in a comprehensive emergency obstetric and new born care centre in North Central Nigeria

Shiktira D. Kwari; Olugbenga Bello; Aminu M. Mai; Abdulhakeem O. Akintobi; Oma Nnena Amadi; Oluseyi Ayoola Asaolu

doi:10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20254259

Authors

Shiktira D. Kwari Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Asokoro District Hospital, Abuja, and Nile University of Nigeria, Abuja, Nigeria
Olugbenga Bello Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Asokoro District Hospital, Abuja, Nigeria
Aminu M. Mai Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Nile University of Nigeria, Abuja, Nigeria
Abdulhakeem O. Akintobi Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Nile University of Nigeria, Abuja, Nigeria
Oma Nnena Amadi Department of Paediatrics, Asokoro District Hospital, Abuja, and Nile University of Nigeria, Abuja, Nigeria
Oluseyi Ayoola Asaolu Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Nile University of Nigeria, Abuja, Nigeria

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20254259

Keywords:

Fetomaternal outcome, Forceps, Instrumental vaginal delivery, Vacuum

Abstract

Background: Instrumental vaginal delivery (IVD) is a long-standing obstetric practice used to expedite vaginal delivery and avoid cesarean section, along with its associated fetal and maternal morbidity and mortality. Recent trends have shown that IVD, especially the use of forceps, has declined, as the rate of caesarean deliveries continues to increase.

Methods: This was a retrospective descriptive study to determine the rate of instrumental vaginal deliveries, the common indications, and to compare fetomaternal outcomes between forceps and vacuum deliveries in a Comprehensive Emergency Obstetric and New-born Care Centre in North Central Nigeria. The labour ward registers were used to compile a list of parturient who had instrumental vaginal deliveries between 2013 and 2019, and in 2021-2023 in the facility. Sociodemographic data, indications for IVD, and fetomaternal outcomes were retrieved from the electronic medical database. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS version 25.

Results: During the study period, there were 15,338 deliveries, with 190 (1.23%) being instrumental vaginal deliveries. Among these, forceps and vacuum deliveries accounted for 20 (10.5%) and 170 (89.5%), respectively. The most common indication was prolonged second stage of labour (27.8%). Babies delivered by vacuum were more likely to have birth asphyxia (p=0.03) and be admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (p=0.04). There was no significant association between the type of instruments and maternal complications.

Conclusions: The rate of instrumental vaginal deliveries in our institution is low, with a shift from forceps to vacuum-assisted deliveries. Babies delivered by vacuum were more likely to have birth asphyxia and be admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit, and there is no significant difference in maternal outcomes.

References

Betran AP, Ye J, Moller AB, Souza JP, Zhang J. Trends and projections of caesarean section rates: global and regional estimates: BMJ Global Health. 2021;6:5671.

Murphy DJ, Strachan BK, Bahl R. on behalf of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Assisted Vaginal Birth. Green-top Guideline No. 26. April 2020. Available online at: https://www.rcog.org.uk/guidance/browse-all-guidance/green-top-guidelines/assisted-vaginal-birth-green-top-guideline-no-26/ Accessed on 24 June, 2025.

Mebratu A, Ahmed A, Zemeskel AG, Alemu A, Temesgen T, Molla W, et al. Prevalence, indications and fetal outcomes of operative vaginal delivery in Sub‑Saharan Africa, systematic review, and meta‑analysis. BMC Women’s Health. 2023;23:95-103.

Leung Y, Gibson G, White S, Pettigrew I, Milward K, Milford W, et al. the Royal Australian and New Zealand college of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Women’s Health Committee (RANZCOG). Instrumental vaginal birth, C-Obs 16. March 2020. Available at: https://ranzcog.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/Instrumental-Vaginal-Birth.pdf. Accessed on 24 June, 2025.

Balis B, Debella A, Ketema I, Eshetu B, Zerihun E, Deressa Wayesa A, et al. Prevalence, indications, and outcomes of operative vaginal deliveries among mothers who gave birth in Ethiopia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Glob Womens Health. 2022;3:948288.

Sonawane AA, Gadappa SN, Gaikwad RA. Study of fetomaternal outcome in instrumental vaginal deliveries at a Tertiary Teaching Hospital. The New Indian J OBGYN. 2021;7(2):172-6.

Unuigbe JA, Agbon-Ojeme GE, Erhatiemwomon RA, Maduako KT. Instrumental vaginal deliveries: A review.Trop J Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;35:99-107.

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. American J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;220(2):193.

Jumbo CTH, Ayogu ME, Abdullahi HI. Outcome of instrumental vaginal delivery in University of Abuja Teaching Hospital: a five-year review. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol 2021;10:2390-4.

Egbodo CO, Edugbe AE, Akunaeziri AU, Ayuba C, Oga EO, Shambe HI, et al. Instrumental Vaginal Delivery at Jos University Teaching Hospital (JUTH): forceps versus vacuum extraction, a four-year retrospective review. Res Obst Gynecol. 2018;6(3):47-51.

Aliyu LD, Kadas AS, Hauwa MA. Instrumental Vaginal Delivery In Bauchi, Northeast Nigeria. J West African College of Surg. 2011;1(4):18-27.

Babah OA, Saalu TT, Adekanye TV, Owie E, Soibi-Harry A, Ofoegbu OU. Trends and outcomes of instrumental vaginal deliveries at Lagos University Teaching Hospital: A 10-year review. African Journal of Feto-Maternal Med. 2022;1(1):9-13.

Garba JA, Burodo AT, Saidu AD, Sulaiman B, Umar AG, Ibrahim R, et al. Instrumental vaginal delivery in Usmanu Danfodiyo University Teaching Hospital, Sokoto: A ten-year review. Trop J Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;35:123-7.

Sahoo RK, Mohapatra S. Fetomaternal Outcome in Instrumental Vaginal Delivery. Int J Pharma Clin Res. 2022;14(7);750-5.

Sium AF, Gudu W, Lucero-Prisno DE, Tilahun A. Predictors of adverse perinatal and maternal outcomes of instrumental vaginal delivery at a tertiary setting in Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study. Public Health Chall. 2022;1:41.

Israel E, Abayneh S, Utalo D, Geta T, Kassaw T, Shonde T, et al. Determinants of fetomaternal complications of instrumental vaginal delivery among women who gave childbirth in Southern Ethiopia: a facility-based cross-sectional study. BMC Res. 2023;16:308-14.

Jeyamani B, Dhasleema AN. Fetomaternal outcome in operative vaginal delivery. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2021;10:4096-100.

Alegbeleye JO, Orazulike NC, Nyengidiki TK, Uzoigwe SA. A 10 years review of instrumental vaginal delivery at the University of Port Harcourt Teaching Hospital, Port Harcourt, Nigeria. Trop J Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;35:118-22.

Ochejele S, Musa J, Eka PO, Attah DI, Ameh T, Daru PH, et al. Trends and operators of instrumental vaginal deliveries in Jos, Nigeria: A 7-year study (1997–2003). Trop J Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;35:79-83.

Shehu CE, Omembelede JC. Instrumental vaginal delivery - an assessment of use in a tertiary care centre. Orient J Med. 2016;28(2):22-7.