Intervention description (CONSORT-NPT items 5 and 5b)
Of the 69 device intervention and comparator groups across the 36 studies, specific device name(s) were provided in 61 (32 intervention, 29 comparator), within which there were different brands of forceps (n=11), ventouse (n=16), and the Odon Device. The remaining eight stated only that ‘forceps’ (n=4) or ‘ventouse’ (n=4) were used.
Two papers provided a single sentence related to device use but these did not constitute intervention descriptions: ‘hospital guidelines for instrumental delivery were followed for all patients…’. , ‘for outlet forceps deliveries, we used classic instruments…and standard techniques and classification…’.
Eighteen papers (50%) provided some form of description of how to deliver at least one of the interventions; all but two relating to the ventouse. Descriptions were heterogeneous, with no papers providing ‘precise details’ for any included intervention. In terms of the components, some description was provided for device application (n=2), creating a vacuum (n=17), device traction (n=10) and no information was provided about device removal (Table 2). No papers provided intervention descriptions for forceps devices. The paper reporting on the Odon Device provided both narrative and pictorial descriptions of how to use it However, not all components were included and therefore the description was not considered as precise. This paper was one of only three that explicitly stated that the device or device technique was new. Of the other two, one referenced previous work on the new device and another provided detailed description of intervention delivery, discussing the majority (but not all) of the components.
Co-interventions were described in six papers (17%) and consisted of: bladder care prior to device use (n=4), maternal position (n=2) and use of analgesia (n=3) (Table 2).