Which factors play a role in clinical decision-making in external cephalic version?

References

• Hickok DE, Gordon DC, Milberg JA, Williams MA, Daling JR. The frequency of breech presentation by gestational age at birth: a large population-based study. 1. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992; 166(3)851–2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofmeyr GJ Kulier R. External cephalic version for breech presentation at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000;(2): CD000083.
   Google Scholar
• Collaris RJ, Oei SG. External cephalic version: a safe procedure? A systematic review of version-related risks. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2004; 83(6)511–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leung TY, Lau TK, Lo KW, Rogers MS. A survey of pregnant women's attitude towards breech delivery and external cephalic version. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol. 2000; 40(3)253–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raynes-Greenow CH, Roberts CL, Barratt A, Brodrick B, Peat B. Pregnant women's preferences and knowledge of term breech management in an Australian setting. Midwifery. 2004; 20(2)181–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yogev Y, Horowitz E, Ben-Haroush A, Chen R, Kaplan B. Changing attitudes toward mode of delivery and external cephalic version in breech presentations. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2002; 79(3)221–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bewley S, Robson SC, Smith M, Glover A, Spencer JA. The introduction of external cephalic version at term into routine clinical practice. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1993; 52(2)89–93
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caukwell S, Joels LA, Kyle PM, Mills MS. Women's attitudes towards management of breech presentation at term. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2002; 22(5)486–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Leung TY, Lau TK, Lo KW, Rogers MS. A survey of pregnant women's attitude towards breech delivery and external cephalic version. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynaecol. 2000; 40(3)253–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aisenbrey GA, Catanzarite VA, Nelson C. External cephalic version: predictors of success. Obstet Gynecol 1999; 94(5 Pt1)783–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferguson JE, Armstrong MA, Dyson DC. Maternal and fetal factors affecting success of antepartum external cephalic version. Obstet Gynecol. 1987; 70(5)722–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fortunato SJ, Mercer LJ, Guzick DS. External cephalic version with tocolysis: factors associated with success. Obstet Gynecol. 1988; 72(1)59–62
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hellstrom AC, Nilsson B, Stange L, Nylund L. When does external cephalic version succeed?. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1990; 69(4)281–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lau TK, Lo KW, Wan D, Rogers MS. Predictors of successful external cephalic version at term: a prospective study. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997; 104(7)798–802
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Newman RB, Peacock BS, VanDorsten JP, Hunt HH. Predicting success of external cephalic version. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1993; 169(2 Pt1)245–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong WM, Lao TT, Liu KL. Predicting the success of external cephalic version with a scoring system. A prospective, two-phase study. J Reprod Med. 2000; 45(3)201–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van der Steeg JW, Steures P, Eijkemans MJ, Habbema JD, Bossuyt PM, Hompes PG, et al. Do clinical prediction models improve concordance of treatment decisions in reproductive medicine?. BJOG. 2006; 113(7)825–31
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fortunato SJ, Mercer LJ, Guzick DS. External cephalic version with tocolysis: factors associated with success. Obstet Gynecol. 1988; 72(1)59–62
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haas DM, Magann EF. External cephalic version with an amniotic fluid index < or =10: a systematic review. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2005; 18(4)249–52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phelan JP, Smith CV, Broussard P, Small M. Amniotic fluid volume assessment with the four-quadrant technique at 36–42 weeks’ gestation. J Reprod Med. 1987; 32(7)540–2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Addelman S. Symmetrical and asymmetrical fractional factorial plans. Technometrics. 1962; 4: 47–58
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phelan JP, Smith CV, Broussard P, Small M. Amniotic fluid volume assessment with the four-quadrant technique at 36–42 weeks’ gestation. J Reprod Med. 1987; 32(7)540–2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar