OptiBreech collaborative care versus standard care for women with a breech-presenting fetus at term: A pilot parallel group randomised trial to evaluate the feasibility of a randomised trial nested within a cohort

• Published in: PloS one Vol. 18; no. 11; p. e0294139
• Main Authors: Walker, Shawn, Spillane, Emma, Stringer, Kate, Trepte, Lauren, Davies, Siân M, Bresson, Jacana, Sandall, Jane, Shennan, Andrew
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Public Library of Science 15.11.2023; Public Library of Science (PLoS)
• Subjects: Birth; Breech presentation; Breech Presentation - therapy; Care and treatment; Cesarean Section - methods; Childbirth; Childbirth & labor; Clinical trials; Cohort analysis; Cohort Studies; Collaboration; Complications and side effects; Consent; Counseling; Ethnicity; Evaluation; Feasibility; Feasibility Studies; Female; Fetus; Fetuses; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Midwifery; Morbidity; Neonatal care; Neonates; Newborn babies; Obstetrics; Patient outcomes; Patients; Planning; Pregnancy; Randomization; Vagina; Womens health; United Kingdom; United Kingdom > UK
• ISSN: 1932-6203; 1932-6203
• DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0294139

OptiBreech collaborative care is a multi-disciplinary care pathway for breech presentation at term, with continuity from a breech specialist midwife, including where chosen, for vaginal breech birth (VBB). Pilot randomised trial using unblinded 1:1 parallel group allocation to OptiBreech versus standard care, within a cohort. Participants were women with a breech-presenting fetus > 33 weeks, at four sites in England, January-June 2022. A two-stage consent process was used. Participants consented to undergo random selection to be offered a 'new care process', with a choice to accept it, or not. Primary objectives were to identify recruitment, acceptance, and attrition rates. Randomisation procedures and potential primary outcomes for a substantive study were also feasibility-tested. 68 women were randomised between January-June 2022. The consent process was acceptable to participants, but randomisation was unacceptable to women who specifically sought OptiBreech care. Two women withdrew due to concerns about sharing personal information. More women planned a VBB when randomised to OptiBreech Care (23.5% vs 0, p = .002, 95% CI = 9.3%,37.8%). Women randomised to OptiBreech care had: lower rates of cephalic presentation at birth (38.2% vs 54.5%), higher rates of vaginal birth (32.4% vs 24.2%), lower rates of in-labour caesarean birth (20.6% vs 36.4%), lower rates of neonatal intensive care (5.9% vs 9.1%), and lower rates of severe neonatal morbidity (2.9% vs 9.1%). Randomisation was stopped on the advice of the steering committee before the planned sample of 104, as lack of access to VBB within standard care prohibited comparison of outcomes. Demand for VBB is sufficient for a cohort study, but comparison of outcomes by 1:1 randomisation is not feasible. OptiBreech care would be best evaluated using stepped wedge cluster randomisation. Funded by the United Kingdom National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR300582). Clinical trial registration: ISRCTN 14521381.