Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Recognition of Disproportion

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Shoulder Dystocia and Birth Injury

Summary

Recognition of molding, fundal height measurement, estimated fetal weight, and clinical pelvimetry will lead to the diagnosis of cephalopelvic disproportion.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Schifrin B, Cohen W. Labor’s dysfunctional lexicon. Obstet Gynecol 1989;74:121–124.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Hibbard LT. Shoulder dystocia. Obstet Gynecol 1969;34:424–429.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Mazzanti GA. Delivery of the anterior shoulder. Obstet Gynecol 1959;13:603–607.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Rubin A. Management of shoulder dystocia. JAMA 1964;189:835–839.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Heery RD. A method to relieve shoulder dystocia in vertex presentation. Obstet Gynecol 1963;22:360–361.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Chavis WM. A new instrument for the management of shoulder dystocia. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1979;16:331–332.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Woods CE. A principle of physics as applicable to shoulder delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1943;45:796–804.

    Google Scholar 

  8. DeLee JB. The Principles and Practices of Obstetrics Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 1925:1043.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Barnum CG. Dystocia due to the shoulders. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1945;50:439–442.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Litt RL. Previous shoulder dystocia as an indication for primary cesarean section. Coll Lett Int Corres Soc Obstet Gynecol 1980;21:170.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gonik B, Stringer CA, Held B. An alternate maneuver for management of shoulder dystocia. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1983;145:882–884.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Myerscough PR. Shoulder dystocia (chapter 13). Monroe Kerr’s Operative Obstetrics London 3rd ed., England: Bailliere Tindall; 1982:347–354.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hartfield VJ. Subcutaneous symphysiotomy–time for a reappraisal? Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1973;13:147–149.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Normal RJ. Six years experience of symphysiotomy in a teaching hospital. Sfr Med J 1978;52:1121–1124.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Acker DB, Sachs BP, Friedman EA. Risk factors for shoulder dystocia. Obstet Gynecol 1985;66:762–768.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Acker DB, Sachs BP, Friedman EA. Risk factors for shoulder dystocia in the average weight infant. Obstet Gynecol 1986;67:614–618.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Bassell GM, Humayun SG, Marx GF. Maternal bearing down efforts—another fetal risk? Obstet Gynecol 1980;56:39–41.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Beynon CL. The normal second stage of labor: A plea for reform in its conduct. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Commonw 1957;64:815–820.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Dierker LJ, Rosen M, Thompson K, Debanne S, Lynn P. The midforceps: Maternal and neonatal outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1985;152:176–183.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Greis JB, Bieniarz J, Scommengna A. Comparison of maternal and fetal effect of vacuum extraction birth forceps or cesarean deliveries. Obstet Gynecol 1981;52:571–577.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Stewart KS, Philpott RH. Fetal response to cephalopelvic disproportion. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1980;87:641.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Quilligan EJ, Zuspan F. Douglas-Stromme Operative Obstetrics 4th ed. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts; 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Steer CM. Moloy’s Evaluation of the Pelvis in Obstetrics 3rd ed. New York: Plenum Publishing; 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Danforth DN. A method of forceps rotation in persistent occiput posterior. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1953;65:120.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Danforth WC. Forceps (chapter 12). In: Curtis AH, ed. Obstetrics and Gynecology, II Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 1933:232–239.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Friedman EA. Evaluation and management of pelvic dystocia. Contemp Obstet Gynecol 1976;7:155.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Friedman EA. Labor: Clinical Evaluation and Management New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts; 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Friedman EA. Patterns of labor as indicators of risk. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1973;16:172.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Friedman EA. Trial of labor: Formulation, application and retrospective clinical evaluation. Obstet Gynecol 1957;10:1.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Niswander K. Manual of Obstetrics: Diagnosis and Therapy. 3rd ed. Boston: Little Brown; 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  31. O’Grady J, Gimovsky M, McIlhargie C. Operative Obstetrics. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Burke L, Rubin HW, Berenberg AL. The significance of the unengaged vertex in a nullipara at 38 weeks. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1958;76:132.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Oxorn H, Foote W. Human Labor and Birth. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts; 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Friedman EA, Sachtleben MR, Bresky PA. Dysfunctional labor, XII: long term effects on infant. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1977;127:779–785.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Hillis DS. Diagnosis of contracted pelvis. III Med J 1938;74:131–134.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Pritchard J, MacDonald P, Gant NF, eds. Williams Obstetrics. 17th ed. Norwalk, CT: Appleton-Century-Crofts; 1985:689.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Dunnihoo D. Fundamentals of Gynecology and Obstetrics. Second ed. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott; 357–359, 586.

    Google Scholar 

  38. DeCherney A, Pernoll M. Current Obstetric and Gynecologic Diagnosis and Treatment. 8th ed. 1994:353.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Nocon J. Shoulder dystocia (chapter 13). In: Operative Obstetrics. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1995;13, 233–256.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Bernard J, Dufour P, Vinatier D. et al. Fetal macrosomia: Risk factors and outcome. European J Obstet Gynecol 1998;77:51–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Stewart K, Philpott R. Fetal response to cephalopelvic disproportion. Br J Obstet Gynecol 1980;87:64–69.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Philpott R. Obstructed labour. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1982;9:663–683.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Philpott R. The recognition of cephalopelvic disproportion. Clin obstet Gynecol 1982;9:609–624.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Professor Obstetrics & Gynecology (retired), University of south Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA

    James A. O’Leary

Authors
  1. James A. O’Leary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

James A. O'Leary

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Humana Press, a part of Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

O’Leary, J.A. (2009). Recognition of Disproportion. In: O'Leary, J. (eds) Shoulder Dystocia and Birth Injury. Humana Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59745-473-5_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59745-473-5_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-934115-28-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-59745-473-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation