Observational pilot study reveals frequent anterior rotation and high vaginal delivery rates in posterior foetal presentations, indicating maternal movement may improve labour outcomes.
Background/objectives: The most common foetal malposition is the occipital posterior (OP) position, which accounts for 33.3% of malpositions occurring during labour, and the rate of dystocia reaches 95%. The aim of this study was to describe observed outcomes of a mobilisation protocol in correcting posterior foetal head positions during labour. Methods: A pilot study was conducted using a cross-sectional, multicentre methodology involving 25 pregnant women with a posterior foetal position who were asked to follow a mobilisation protocol. The women’s level of satisfaction was measured using the validated questionnaire, the Childbirth Experience Questionnaire—CEQ (Spanish version). Results: Anterior rotation was observed in 68% of cases, but in the absence of a control group, these findings cannot be distinguished from spontaneous physiological rotation, and 88% of these achieved vaginal delivery with a 95% confidence interval (76–100%). Apgar scores of ≥9 at 5 min were recorded in 100% of newborns, with an average of 9.96 with a 95% confidence interval (9.88–10.04). Women’s level of satisfaction was moderate to high, with the ‘Professional support’ and ‘Participation’ subscales standing out in particular; 100% of women noted the support they received from the midwife, and 95.24% stated that they had been involved in decision-making. Regarding perineal outcomes, no third-degree tears were recorded among women who received the protocol, and 44% of participants maintained an intact perineum. Conclusions: The protocol was feasible to implement, and anterior rotation, vaginal deliveries, favourable neonatal outcomes, and moderate-to-high maternal satisfaction were observed in this small cohort. However, future research will need to demonstrate the protocol’s efficacy through randomised controlled trials comparing the protocol with standard care.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ferrer et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: