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).