AzTrials
AzTrials

Instrumental DeliveryASSISTEthiopiaNCT06918509

ASSIST Ethiopia: Feasibility Clinical Investigation of the Odonassist™ Medical Device

A study testing OdonAssistTM in people with Instrumental Delivery and Medical Device, run by Doctors with Africa - CUAMM at 1 site in Ethiopia.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The Innovation The OdonAssist™ is a medical device for assisted vaginal delivery (AVD), that is defined by the need of additional procedure to facilitate childbirth in order to reduce foetal-maternal risks. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older, women only
What is being tested?
OdonAssistTM
Type of treatment
Medical device
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
20 participants
Where
1 siteEthiopia
Study dates
1 Apr 2025to 31 Mar 2026
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • Women only
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Women will be able to participate in the ASSIST Ethiopia Study if all of the following apply at initial consent:
  • ≥18 years of age;
  • singleton pregnancy of at least 36 weeks' gestation,
  • negative antenatal screen for HIV and Hepatitis B,
  • in active labour and requiring an assisted vaginal birth for a clinical indication (as per local guidelines),
  • the vertex is 1 cm or more below the ischial spines and there is no obstetric indication for an alternative method of AVB.

Who cannot join

  • Women will not be able to take part in the ASSIST Ethiopia Study if:
  • the fetal vertex is at or above the ischial spines,
  • there is a diagnosis of a fetal skull abnormality (i.e. macrocephaly) or osteogenesis imperfecta,
  • there is a suspicion of a fetal bleeding disorder (von Willebrand's disease, AITP, haemophilia),
  • there is an intrauterine fetal death in the current pregnancy,
  • the woman is sensitive to latex,
  • the woman is currently serving a prison sentence,
  • there is a fetal bradycardia which is on-going and has not recovered.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

Ethiopia1 site
  • St. Luke Catholic Hospital

    Waliso

Other trials in Ethiopia

About this study

Official title: ASSIST Ethiopia: Feasibility Clinical Investigation of Assisted Vaginal Birth With the Odonassist™ Medical Device

The Innovation The OdonAssist™ is a medical device for assisted vaginal delivery (AVD), that is defined by the need of additional procedure to facilitate childbirth in order to reduce foetal-maternal risks. Increasing access to AVD has been identified by the World Health Organization (WHO) as one of the priorities for improving maternal health globally. The OdonAssist™ is a frugal innovation born in the southern hemisphere in an unconventional environment. It was invented by an Argentinian mechanic, Jorge Odon. Its potential to improve maternal and neonatal health is now recognised. It has been designed to be safe, simple to use and better accepted than current devices (forceps, suction cup). Two studies conducted in England and one in France have confirmed these characteristics and funding has recently been obtained for a randomised clinical investigation in five French hospitals.

Project Rationale The present project aims to conduct a feasibility study at Saint Luke's Hospital in Wolisso, a poorly resourced hospital in rural Ethiopia, in order to test the device in a low-income country and assess its acceptability. In addition, with the aim of investigating the efficiency and budgetary impact of this new device, and considering the wider perspective of a future scale-up, data will be collected on its cost-effectiveness, in order to compare it with the reference interventions at local level (vacuum and caesarean section).

Read more

Main research questions:

  1. Is it feasible to introduce the OdonAssist™ (new intervention) at the hospital Saint Luke's in Ethiopia, in terms of preliminary data on safety, efficacy, acceptability by mothers and healthcare providers?
  2. What are the estimated healthcare-related costs of the OdonAssist™ (new intervention) in comparison to traditional alternatives, that are vacuum-assisted delivery or cesarean section during the second stage of labor?

Study population Participants will be assisted with the OdonAssist™ medical device in case they have provided informed consent and they present medical indication for AVD as per protocol. The study will also collect data on a nested cohort of women and babies delivered either by vacuum extractor or by second-stage cesarean section. The information gained from this study will be used to plan for future impact evaluation and cost utility studies relevant for the implementation and for the scaling up of the OdonAssist™ in low resource settings.

The study site will be Saint Luke's Hospital, Wolisso, Oromia region, Ethiopia.

Read the detailed description

INTRODUCTION

The OdonAssist™ inflatable device for assisted vaginal birth (AVB), is a frugal innovation from the southern hemisphere and an unconventional environment as it was invented by an Argentinian car mechanic, Jorge Odon. The device has been developed with the intention to be safe, easy to use and more acceptable than currently used AVB devices (forceps and vacuum extractor) because of its innovative mechanism of action. Its potential for improving maternal and neonatal health is now recognized based on the results of three clinical trials conducted in France and UK.

The investigation proposal is to conduct a feasibility study of OdonAssistTM at Saint Luke's Hospital in Wolisso, Ethiopia, to determine the feasibility of using the OdonAssistTM in a low-income country and assess its acceptability in those settings. In addition, with a view to researching the efficiency and budgetary impact of this innovation, data will be collected on its cost and effectiveness, for comparison with reference interventions at local level (vacuum extractor and emergency second stage caesarean section).

Improving the health of mothers and newborns is among the main priorities of the Ethiopian Health Sector Strategic Plan (HSDP IV). The 2016 Ethiopian Demographic and Health Survey preliminary report indicated that Ethiopia has made good progress in reducing neonatal, infant and under five mortalities reporting respectively 29, 48 and 67 deaths per 1,000 live births in years 0-4 prior to the survey, while these figures were 47, 78 and 116 deaths per 1,000 live births 10-14 years prior to the survey. However, the neonatal mortality rate has not declined significantly, nor has the infant and under-five mortality rate and the maternal mortality rate, which is still high at 557 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births caused by pregnancy-related complications (https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.STA.MMRT.NE).

Complications in childbirth are a major cause of maternal and infant mortality and morbidity, accounting for 4-13% of maternal deaths and 25% of neonatal deaths worldwide. Approximately 10-15% of the 134,000,000 births worldwide each year require assistance with forceps or vacuum extractor or emergency caesarean section at full cervical dilation to avoid serious maternal and neonatal complications. In Ethiopia, it is estimated that 12% of pregnant women have a complicated labor, which, according to published studies, causes between 17% and 36% of maternal deaths, 24% of neonatal deaths, 36% of stillbirths and high rates of obstetric fistulas.

The Ethiopian government has made improving maternal and neonatal health a national priority and has identified limited access to AVB as an obstacle to be overcome. The use of innovations has been advocated as a solution to increase access to medical care. These government policies, aimed at improving maternal and newborn health, will be conducive to future efforts to scale up OdonAssistTM in Ethiopia. In addition, the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO), which issues globally adopted medical guidelines, has expressed in an official letter its interest in supporting the adoption of OdonAssistTM globally.

PROBLEM STATEMENT AND SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

Prolonged and complicated labor is a major cause of maternal and neonatal mortality and long-term morbidity. Prolonged or complicated second stage of labor requiring an AVB with forceps or vacuum extractor, or an emergency caesarean section (CS) occurs in approximately 10-15% of births and contributes to 4-13% of all maternal deaths. AVB can be safer than an emergency CS in the short and long term for mothers and babies. AVB is associated with a reduced risk of maternal hemorrhage, intrapartum stillbirth, admission to intensive care for newborns, abnormally invasive placenta (a life-threatening condition for the mother), stillbirth and preterm birth in subsequent pregnancies; AVB is also more cost effective than a cesarean section. The current options for AVB, forceps and vacuum extractor, require time and practice to acquire sufficient skills for use and, if performed inappropriately, can be associated with significant trauma to both mothers and babies. Insufficient training, limited availability of functioning devices, and pervasive concerns about complications are supply side factors that have all reduced access to AVB, particularly in low and middle income countries where there is the most potential benefit (given the growing concentration of maternal \& perinatal mortality, as well as the increasing proportion of births, in these settings). Although the World Health OrganisationTM lists AVB as a vital function for all basic emergency obstetric care facilities, African countries commonly report AVB as the least available of these functions. In sub-Saharan African countries, AVB rate is approximately 1% as compared to up to 16% in Western Europe.21 Women living in low resource settings who experience prolonged labor are either: left untreated with dire consequences, or referred for an emergency CS with additional risks associated with the requirement for transfer, the potentially less safe/more invasive surgery and the anesthesia required for laparotomy.29 The OdonAssist™ is an innovation that, because of its innovative simple and potentially less traumatic mechanism of action, is designed to improve women's access to AVB by overcoming the entrenched obstacles and barriers that limit its use with the presently available options of forceps and vacuum extractor.

The mechanism of the OdonAssist is based on inflating an air chamber around the fetal head to act as an anchor point, allowing the practitioner to apply traction. The positive safety profile, as observed in the clinical trials conducted so far, will also reduce the concerns with potential maternal and newborn complications presently associated with AVB. We envisage that, with appropriate but less demanding training than for forceps and vacuum, this device could be used by both doctors and midlevel providers such as midwives when allowed by local laws, health policies and guidelines. In addition, the device is single use and provided sterile and ready to use, thereby eliminating the need to ensure maintenance and functionality.

Given these considerations, the specific aim of the proposed study is to assess the feasibility of the OdonAssist in Ethiopia by collecting preliminary data on efficacy rate, safety profile and acceptability to women and health workers and relate them to the outcomes of AVB with vacuum extractor or cesarean section in the second stage of labor. In addition, data will be collected to inform a future evaluation of the cost utility of the OdonAssist in relation to vacuum and second stage cesarean section.

THE ODONASSIST(TM)

An innovative mechanism of action Because of its innovative mechanism of action, the OdonAssistTM is intended to represent an advance in obstetrics which could enhance the safety of AVB and reduce the training requirements. Differently from the forceps and vacuum extractors, the OdonAssistTM mechanism of action works by inflating an air chamber circumferentially around the fetal head to evenly distribute the pressure needed to establish the anchor point for traction. By using a more flexible and softer anchor point, the pressure is evenly distributed 360 degrees around the fetal head. This mechanism represents a potential advantage relative to the focalized pressure applied by the rigid metal blades of the forceps. The lack of need for negative pressure is expected to reduce the risk of both mild and serious negative-pressure related adverse events associated with vacuum extractors, such as subgaleal hemorrhage. Notably, no typical device related pattern of neonatal superficial injury was observed with the OdonAssist in clinical trials, in contrast to the well-known typical effects seen with the use of forceps (e.g. facial marks) and vacuum extractor (e.g. caput succedaneum and circular bruising). The absence of superficial signs and marks on the baby's head and face associated with the use of AVB devices was appreciated by women and health professionals involved in the clinical studies of OdonAssistTM who reported this differentiating characteristic of OdonAssistTM as one of the reasons to prefer it over forceps.

In addition, the mechanism of action and softness of materials of the OdonAssistTM is likely to cause less pain for the newborn than other AVB devices. Fetal pain receptors and nerve tracts are developed by 20-24 weeks gestation in quantities similar to those found in adults, therefore newborns experience pain which can be assessed using validated pain scales such as the EDIN (Échelle de Douleur Inconfort Nouveau-Née, Neonatal Pain and Discomfort Scale) and the NIPS (Neonatal Infant Pain Scale). AVB with vacuum extractor has been associated with a proportion of EDIN scores indicative of pain (39%) much higher than the levels below 5% reported in the safety and efficacy clinical studies of OdonAssist.

Another important difference and potential advantage of OdonAssist over currently used AVB devices is that the application of OdonAssist is not dependent on the position (occipito-anterior, occipito-transverse and occipito-posterior) of the fetal occiput in the birth canal. The OdonAssist device can be used in all possible occiput positions, therefore increasing ease of use, and minimizing the risk of misapplication. During the clinical trials of the OdonAssist, this characteristic prevented the risk of harming the woman and/or the baby because of incorrect application of the device.

Clinical evidence In the clinical studies conducted until now with the OdonAssistTM, there were no severe adverse events causally related to the device, no serious device-related adverse reactions and no serious adverse device effects. In addition, results emerging from the clinical studies are indicative of high maternal and operator satisfaction and acceptability. Operators found the device easy to use for several reasons including the fact that the same application technique is used for all fetal positions meaning there is no risk of incorrectly positioning the device in relation to vulnerable fetal or maternal anatomies. Satisfaction of mothers regarding the use of the device was very high, as women wanted an alternative device for AVB and were keen for a 'kinder' AVB. The observed effectiveness rate of the device improved progressively over time, increasing in each subsequent study and reaching levels of effectiveness consistent with the range of values for AVB reported in the scientific literature.

STUDY OBJECTIVES

The objectives of the study are:

  • To assess the feasibility of the OdonAssist (new intervention) in terms of preliminary data on safety, efficacy, acceptability at the hospital Saint Luke's in Ethiopia and relate them to the performance of vacuum extractor and second stage cesarean section (reference interventions).
  • To perform a cost analysis of the OdonAssist (new intervention) at the hospital Saint Luke's in Ethiopia in comparison with vacuum extractor and second stage Cesarean section (reference interventions).
Being tested
OdonAssistTM
Keywords
OdonAssistTM, Instrumental delivery, Medical device, Feasibility study, Acceptability study, pregnancy

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • OdonAssistTMDevice

    Innovative medical device for operative vaginal delivery as an alternative to vacuum or forceps

Study groups in NCT06918509
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
OdonAssistTM medical deviceExperimentalThe ASSIST Ethiopia Study is a feasibility study of women who require an assisted vaginal birth (AVB) for a recognized clinical indication. Assistance will be performed using the OdonAssistTM medical device.
Receives: Device: OdonAssistTM

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Efficacy of delivery assistance with the OdonAssistTM medical device

    Rate of births successfully assisted with the OdonAssist. An assisted vaginal birth will be defined as 'successful' if all of the following criteria are met:

    • The birth of the baby is expedited with the OdonAssist. (without sequential use of other AVB devices or resorting to cesarean section).
    • There are no serious maternal adverse reactions related to the use of the device during birth.
    • There are no serious neonatal adverse reactions related to the use of the device during birth

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

Secondary outcomes (27)
  1. Maternal safety - Weighed blood loss (grams)

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  2. Maternal safety - Perineal and anal sphincter injury

    Number of 1st/2nd/3rd/4th degree tears and episiotomy

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  3. Maternal safety - Ischio-rectal fossa defect

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  4. Maternal safety - Cervical tear

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  5. Maternal safety - cesarean section performed

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  6. Maternal safety - Maternal death

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  7. Neonatal safety - Apgar scores at 1, 5 and 10 minutes after birth.

    The Apgar scale is a quick assessment of a newborn's well-being after birth, evaluating Appearance (color), Pulse (heart rate), Grimace (reflex irritability), Activity (muscle tone), and Respiration (breathing). Each category is scored 0-2, so total score from 0 to 10 with a higher total score indicating better condition.

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  8. Neonatal safety - Shoulder dystocia

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  9. Neonatal safety - Admission to Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU).

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  10. Neonatal safety - Duration of admission in NICU (hours).

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  11. Neonatal safety - Neonatal death

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  12. Neonatal safety - Neonatal Infant Pain Scores at 2 and 6 h post birth.

    Behavioral scale that uses the behaviors that nurses have described as being indicative of infant pain or distress. It is composed of six (6) indicators.

    • facial expression
    • cry
    • breathing patterns
    • arms
    • legs
    • state of arousal Each indicator is scored with 0 or 1 except "cry", which has three possible descriptors therefore, being scored with a 0, 1 or 2. See the NIPS scale for the description of infant behavior in each indicator group. Infants should be observed for one minute in order to fully assess each indicator. Total pain scores range from 0-7. The suggested interventions based upon the infant's level of pain are listed below.

    0-2 = mild to no pain - No intervention 3-4 = mild to moderate pain - Non-pharmacological intervention, reassessment in 30 minutes >4 = severe pain - Non-pharmacological intervention and possibly a pharmacological intervention with reassessment in 30 minutes

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  13. Neonatal safety - Neonatal soft tissue trauma

    bruise/scalp injury/facial injury/cephalohaematoma

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  14. Neonatal safety - other neonatal complication

    subaponeurotic haemorrhage/hematoma/bone fracture/cerebral contusion/neurological sign/seizure/phototherapy for jaundice/organ failure

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  15. Birth related outcomes - Time from 'decision to perform assisted birth' to 'birth' (minutes).

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  16. Birth related outcomes - Time from 'device application" to 'birth' (minutes).

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  17. Birth related outcomes - Location of birth.

    operating room/delivery ward

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  18. Birth related outcomes - Mode of birth following failed use of OdonAssist.

    vacuum assisted/forceps assisted/second-stage cesarean section

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  19. Device-related outcomes - Failure of a component of the OdonAssist.

    number, description of component the failure was attributed to

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  20. Device-related outcomes - Number of applications of device.

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  21. Device-related outcomes - Number of pulls of the device.

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  22. Device-related outcomes - Perceived reason for device failure from operator

    descriptive, can be attributed to maternal/clinical/device/other factor

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  23. Patient-reported outcomes - Maternal health-related quality of life data (EQ-5D-5L) at day 1 postnatal.

    The Maternal health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data using the EQ-5D-5L scale is a brief, standardized questionnaire assessing five dimensions of health (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression), each with five levels of severity (from 0 to 4, from worse to good health). The overall health state can be converted to a single index score, with the range being 0 to 20, where 20 represents full health and 0 value indicate health states considered worse than death. Additionally, a visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0 (worst imaginable health) to 100 (best imaginable health) is included for a direct self-rating of current health.

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  24. Patient-reported outcomes - Maternal perception of pain at day 1 postnatal

    Perception of pain on an 11-point Likert scale is a subjective self-report where individuals rate their pain intensity on a numerical range from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain).

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  25. Acceptability of the OdonAssistTM medical device - Woman acceptability will be assessed through the patient perception score of birth experience on days 1 postnatal and through qualitative assessment

    Patient's perception of birth experience: score out of 15 where 3 is the lowest score possible and 15 maximum.

    • I felt safe during birth (from 1 to 5, 1 worst and 5 best subjective experience)
    • I felt informed during birth (from 1 to 5, 1 worst and 5 best subjective experience)
    • I felt respected during birth (from 1 to 5, 1 worst and 5 best subjective experience) The patient will also be interviewed to collect descriptive information about birth experience

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  26. Acceptability of the OdonAssistTM medical device - Practitioner acceptability will be assessed through perceived outcomes following each attempted AVB.

    The following will be collected on a 5-point Likert scale (from 1 to 5, worst to best experience) :

    • Perceived overall ease of use of device (for all AVBs).
    • Ease of device set-up (for all AVBs).
    • Ease of device application to the baby's head (for all AVBs).
    • Ease of withdrawal of the applicator after application (for OdonAssist).
    • Comfort with the level of force required to assist the birth of thebaby (for all AVBs).
    • Ease of deflation of the cuff prior to crowning (for OdonAssist).
    • Ease of removal of vacuum extractor. Total score from 7 to 35, worst to best experience.

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

  27. Health economics - Health care resource use and associated health care costs (USD)

    • Direct medical costs will included costs related to treatment (hospitalization, in- and out-patient treatments), monitoring (clinical, biological), medical consultations and management of complications.
    • Indirect medical and intangible costs will be not analyzed

    Measured: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted9 Apr 2025
  2. Study start1 Apr 2025
  3. Primary completion31 Mar 2026
  4. Study completion31 Mar 2026

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Model description
The ASSIST Ethiopia Study is a feasibility study of women who require an assisted vaginal birth (AVB) for a recognized clinical indication in a low-resource setting. Early feasibility studies have reported success rates ranging from 50% to 80%. To ensure we obtain 10 quality assessments from both patients and healthcare providers, a sample size of 20 subjects is anticipated. This number accounts for potential data loss due to technical issues, patient dropouts, and variability in responses. The goal of this feasibility study is to obtain meaningful preliminary data of safety, efficacy and acceptability in a low-resourced setting, that are crucial to inform the implementation of the device within the African environment.
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
20 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT06918509
Sponsor's protocol ID
CUAMM
Acronym
ASSISTEthiopia
Status last verified
Apr 2025
First submitted
17 Mar 2025
Last updated
23 Apr 2026
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No: Data sharing was not part of the initial study mandate under the multi-partner consortium agreement. Consequently, individual participant data will not be made publicly available. Any inquiries regarding data collaboration or specific data access must be submitted to the Sponsor for formal review and are subject to the final decision of the consortium steering committee.

Publications

  • Schuller C, Kanel N, Muller O, Kind AB, Tinner EM, Hosli I, Zimmermann R, Surbek D. Stress and pain response of neonates after spontaneous birth and vacuum-assisted and cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Nov;207(5):416.e1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2012.08.024. Epub 2012 Aug 17.

    PubMed 22959831
  • Hotton EJ, Blencowe NS, Lenguerrand E, Draycott TJ, Crofts JF, Wade J. Women's experiences of the Odon Device to assist vaginal birth and participation in intrapartum research: a qualitative study in a maternity unit in the Southwest of England. BMJ Open. 2021 Dec 15;11(12):e057023. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057023.

    PubMed 34911726
  • Sobhy S, Arroyo-Manzano D, Murugesu N, Karthikeyan G, Kumar V, Kaur I, Fernandez E, Gundabattula SR, Betran AP, Khan K, Zamora J, Thangaratinam S. Maternal and perinatal mortality and complications associated with caesarean section in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2019 May 11;393(10184):1973-1982. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32386-9. Epub 2019 Mar 28.

    PubMed 30929893
  • Verma GL, Spalding JJ, Wilkinson MD, Hofmeyr GJ, Vannevel V, O'Mahony F. Instruments for assisted vaginal birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Sep 24;9(9):CD005455. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005455.pub3.

    PubMed 34559884
  • Bahl R, Hotton E, Crofts J, Draycott T. Assisted vaginal birth in 21st century: current practice and new innovations. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2024 Mar;230(3S):S917-S931. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.12.305. Epub 2023 Jul 28.

    PubMed 38462263
  • Moraitis AA, Oliver-Williams C, Wood AM, Fleming M, Pell JP, Smith G. Previous caesarean delivery and the risk of unexplained stillbirth: retrospective cohort study and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2015 Oct;122(11):1467-74. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.13461. Epub 2015 May 29.

    PubMed 26033155
  • Clark EA, Silver RM. Long-term maternal morbidity associated with repeat cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Dec;205(6 Suppl):S2-10. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2011.09.028. Epub 2011 Oct 6.

    PubMed 22114995
  • Bailey PE, van Roosmalen J, Mola G, Evans C, de Bernis L, Dao B. Assisted vaginal delivery in low and middle income countries: an overview. BJOG. 2017 Aug;124(9):1335-1344. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.14477. Epub 2017 Jan 31.

    PubMed 28139878
  • Nolens B, Capelle M, van Roosmalen J, Mola G, Byamugisha J, Lule J, Faye A, van den Akker T. Use of assisted vaginal birth to reduce unnecessary caesarean sections and improve maternal and perinatal outcomes. Lancet Glob Health. 2019 Apr;7(4):e408-e409. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(19)30043-9. No abstract available.

    PubMed 30879501
  • Maheu-Giroux M, Filippi V, Samadoulougou S, Castro MC, Maulet N, Meda N, Kirakoya-Samadoulougou F. Prevalence of symptoms of vaginal fistula in 19 sub-Saharan Africa countries: a meta-analysis of national household survey data. Lancet Glob Health. 2015 May;3(5):e271-8. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(14)70348-1.

    PubMed 25889469
  • Gedefaw G, Wondmieneh A, Getie A, Bimerew M, Demis A. Estimating the Prevalence and Risk Factors of Obstetric Fistula in Ethiopia: Results from Demographic and Health Survey. Int J Womens Health. 2021 Jul 7;13:683-690. doi: 10.2147/IJWH.S306221. eCollection 2021.

    PubMed 34262358
  • Berhan Y, Berhan A. Causes of maternal mortality in Ethiopia: a significant decline in abortion related death. Ethiop J Health Sci. 2014 Sep;24 Suppl(0 Suppl):15-28. doi: 10.4314/ejhs.v24i0.3s.

    PubMed 25489180
  • Ayenew AA. Incidence, causes, and maternofetal outcomes of obstructed labor in Ethiopia: systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod Health. 2021 Mar 10;18(1):61. doi: 10.1186/s12978-021-01103-0.

    PubMed 33691736
  • Addisu D, Mekie M, Melkie A, Yeshambel A. Burden of obstructed labor in ethiopia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Midwifery. 2021 Apr;95:102930. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2021.102930. Epub 2021 Feb 5.

    PubMed 33581417
  • Khan KS, Wojdyla D, Say L, Gulmezoglu AM, Van Look PF. WHO analysis of causes of maternal death: a systematic review. Lancet. 2006 Apr 1;367(9516):1066-1074. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68397-9.

    PubMed 16581405

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing OdonAssistTM in people with Instrumental Delivery and Medical Device, run by Doctors with Africa - CUAMM at 1 site in Ethiopia.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 8 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 23 Apr 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Ethiopia. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Efficacy of delivery assistance with the OdonAssistTM medical device (time frame: From enrollment to 6 weeks postpartum). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06918509, which also lists 19 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 23 Apr 2026.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in