FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2087449050> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2087449050 endingPage "591" @default.
• W2087449050 startingPage "591" @default.
• W2087449050 abstract "To the Editors: The article by E. D. Gurewitsch et al1Gurewitsch E.D. Kim E.J. Yang J.H. Outland K.E. McDonald M.K. Allen R.H. Comparing McRoberts' and Rubin's maneuvers for initial management of shoulder dystocia: an objective evaluation.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 192: 153-160Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (46) Google Scholar was a very interesting read. The authors have done an excellent job comparing and evaluating the 2 maneuvers typically used for shoulder dystocia. I would like the authors' opinion on a couple of issues with these maneuvers.An assistant is quite useful in all shoulder dystocia maneuvers, except a posterior arm extraction. The assistant can flex the pelvis while the obstetrician applies traction. Utility of an assistant is clear for the Rubin's maneuver; the assistant applies traction while the obstetrician is rotating the shoulders. Experience has shown that without traction you will not achieve descensus. Again, the Woods' maneuver has been likened to “winding a screw caught in threads.” This catching of the threads does not happen if there is not traction along with rotation. Rotation alone will make a circle without descensus. Have the authors noted a similar relationship between traction and rotation?The other factor of concern is that when the bisacromial diameter is rotated to the pelvic oblique diameter and traction is done, the soft tissue immediately rotates the bisacromial diameter to the anterior posterior pelvic diameter and progress was not obtained. Could this position be held in place by the assistant holding pressure at the scapula with a forceps blade or Dr. Chavis's idea, the shoe horn?2Chavis W.M. A new instrument for the management of shoulder dystocia.Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1979; 16: 331Google ScholarIt is good to know the anterior Rubin's maneuver is more beneficial and that it needs less pull from the obstetrician and less strain to the brachial plexus. Some of us will first try the posterior Rubin's maneuver to take advantage of the sacrum curvature, although in light of this review, it will not be a first option.Thank you for allowing us to ask a question. To the Editors: The article by E. D. Gurewitsch et al1Gurewitsch E.D. Kim E.J. Yang J.H. Outland K.E. McDonald M.K. Allen R.H. Comparing McRoberts' and Rubin's maneuvers for initial management of shoulder dystocia: an objective evaluation.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 192: 153-160Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (46) Google Scholar was a very interesting read. The authors have done an excellent job comparing and evaluating the 2 maneuvers typically used for shoulder dystocia. I would like the authors' opinion on a couple of issues with these maneuvers. An assistant is quite useful in all shoulder dystocia maneuvers, except a posterior arm extraction. The assistant can flex the pelvis while the obstetrician applies traction. Utility of an assistant is clear for the Rubin's maneuver; the assistant applies traction while the obstetrician is rotating the shoulders. Experience has shown that without traction you will not achieve descensus. Again, the Woods' maneuver has been likened to “winding a screw caught in threads.” This catching of the threads does not happen if there is not traction along with rotation. Rotation alone will make a circle without descensus. Have the authors noted a similar relationship between traction and rotation? The other factor of concern is that when the bisacromial diameter is rotated to the pelvic oblique diameter and traction is done, the soft tissue immediately rotates the bisacromial diameter to the anterior posterior pelvic diameter and progress was not obtained. Could this position be held in place by the assistant holding pressure at the scapula with a forceps blade or Dr. Chavis's idea, the shoe horn?2Chavis W.M. A new instrument for the management of shoulder dystocia.Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1979; 16: 331Google Scholar It is good to know the anterior Rubin's maneuver is more beneficial and that it needs less pull from the obstetrician and less strain to the brachial plexus. Some of us will first try the posterior Rubin's maneuver to take advantage of the sacrum curvature, although in light of this review, it will not be a first option. Thank you for allowing us to ask a question. ReplyAmerican Journal of Obstetrics & GynecologyVol. 194Issue 2PreviewTo the Editors: We thank Dr Escamilla for his interest in our recent paper. To address concerns that he expressed about shoulder dystocia maneuvers, we offer the following thoughts: Full-Text PDF" @default.
• W2087449050 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2087449050 creator A5060086047 @default.
• W2087449050 date "2006-02-01" @default.
• W2087449050 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2087449050 title "Comparing McRoberts' and Rubin's maneuvers for initial management of shoulder dystocia: An objective evaluation" @default.
• W2087449050 cites W2078823699 @default.
• W2087449050 cites W2416071201 @default.
• W2087449050 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2005.07.019" @default.
• W2087449050 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16458671" @default.
• W2087449050 hasPublicationYear "2006" @default.
• W2087449050 type Work @default.
• W2087449050 sameAs 2087449050 @default.
• W2087449050 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2087449050 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2087449050 hasAuthorship W2087449050A5060086047 @default.
• W2087449050 hasBestOaLocation W20874490501 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConcept C2777325788 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConcept C2778357063 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConcept C2779234561 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConcept C2779470629 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConcept C29694066 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConcept C3019755574 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConcept C38834483 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConcept C54355233 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConcept C78519656 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConceptScore W2087449050C127413603 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConceptScore W2087449050C141071460 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConceptScore W2087449050C2777325788 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConceptScore W2087449050C2778357063 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConceptScore W2087449050C2779234561 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConceptScore W2087449050C2779470629 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConceptScore W2087449050C29694066 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConceptScore W2087449050C3019755574 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConceptScore W2087449050C38834483 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConceptScore W2087449050C54355233 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConceptScore W2087449050C71924100 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConceptScore W2087449050C78519656 @default.
• W2087449050 hasConceptScore W2087449050C86803240 @default.
• W2087449050 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W2087449050 hasLocation W20874490501 @default.
• W2087449050 hasLocation W20874490502 @default.
• W2087449050 hasOpenAccess W2087449050 @default.
• W2087449050 hasPrimaryLocation W20874490501 @default.
• W2087449050 hasRelatedWork W2003938723 @default.
• W2087449050 hasRelatedWork W2027166837 @default.
• W2087449050 hasRelatedWork W2033868204 @default.
• W2087449050 hasRelatedWork W2047967234 @default.
• W2087449050 hasRelatedWork W2073846686 @default.
• W2087449050 hasRelatedWork W2076124240 @default.
• W2087449050 hasRelatedWork W2093419263 @default.
• W2087449050 hasRelatedWork W2439875401 @default.
• W2087449050 hasRelatedWork W4386278535 @default.
• W2087449050 hasRelatedWork W944941219 @default.
• W2087449050 hasVolume "194" @default.
• W2087449050 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2087449050 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2087449050 magId "2087449050" @default.
• W2087449050 workType "article" @default.