Skip to main content


Log in

A Comparative Study of Feto-Maternal Outcome in Instrumental Vaginal Delivery

  • Original Article
  • Published:
The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India Aims and scope Submit manuscript



To compare maternal and neonatal outcomes of vacuum versus forceps application in assisted vaginal delivery.

Material and Method

Women in labor with vertex presentation were delivered by vacuum and forceps. A total of 120 cases were included in this prospective study. Maternal and neonatal morbidity were compared in terms of perineal lacerations, episiotomy extension, post-partum hemorrhage, Apgar score, instrumental injuries, NICU admissions PNM etc. χ2 test was used to analyze the data.


Maternal morbidity viz. episiotomy extension as well as first and second degree perineal tear were significant in the forceps group (P = 0.0001 and P = 0.02, respectively). With regards to neonatal morbidity, no statistically significant difference was noted.


Vacuum and forceps should remain appropriate tools in the armamentarium of the modern obstetrician. However, ventouse may be chosen first (if there is no fetal distress) as it is significantly less likely to injure the mother.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Photograph 1
Photograph 2
Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others


  1. ACOG Practice Bulletin. Clinical management guidelines for obstetricians-gynecologists. Number 17. 2000.

  2. Demissie K, Rhoads GG, Smulian JC, et al. Operative vaginal delivery, neonatal, infant adverse outcomes: population based retrospective analysis. BMJ. 2004;329:24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Wu Wen S, Shiliang L, Kramer SM, et al. Comparison of maternal and infant outcomes between vacuum extraction and forceps deliveries. Am J Epidemiol. 2001;153:103–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Archanna S, Monga D. Outcome of forceps delivery versus vacuum extraction—a review of 200 cases. Singapore Med J. 1994;35:605–8.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Okunwobi YS, Cooke I, Mackenzie IZ. Decision to delivery intervals for assisted vaginal vertex delivery. BJOG. 2000;107:467–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Miksovsky P, Watson WJ. Obstetric vacuum extraction: state of the art in the new millennium. Obstet Gynaecol Surv. 2001;56:736–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Patel BS, Pandya NC, Sahram AS. Maternal and perinatal outcome in forceps and ventouse extraction delivery: a comparative study. Obstet Gynaecol Surv. 2000;5:614–9.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Royal College of Obstetricians & Gynaecologists. Instrumental vaginal delivery. Guideline No. 26. London: RCOG; 2005.

  9. Cargill YM, Mackinnon CJ. Guidelines for operative vaginal birth. Society of obstetrician & gynecologists of Canada, SOGC clinical practice guidelines no. 148. J Obstet Gynecol Can. 2004;26:747–53.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Johnson RB, Menon V. Vacuum extraction versus forceps for assisted vaginal delivery. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; 1999 (issue 2).

  11. Eason E, Labraque M, Marioux S, et al. Anal incontinence after childbirth. CMAJ. 2002;166:326–30.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Prapas N, Kalogiannidis I, Masoura S, et al. Operative vaginal delivery in singleton term pregnancies: short term maternal and neonatal outcomes. Hippokratia. 2009;13:41–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abha Singh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Singh, A., Rathore, P. A Comparative Study of Feto-Maternal Outcome in Instrumental Vaginal Delivery. J Obstet Gynecol India 61, 663–666 (2011).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: