Cesarean SectionNCT02899260
Using the Peanut Exercise Ball to Reduce Cesarean Section Rates: A Randomized Controlled Trial
A study testing Peanut Exercise Ball in people with Cesarean Section, run by Virginia Commonwealth University at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
This study is designed as a prospective, randomized controlled trial that will compare the use of the peanut exercise ball in laboring patients compared with no use of the exercise ball. We hypothesize that use of the peanut ball decreases the incidence of cesarean section. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Cesarean Section
- What is being tested?
- Peanut Exercise Ball
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 316 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Aug 2016to 10 Apr 2019
- 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
- Inclusion Criteria for this study include pregnant women over the age of 18 who present to VCU Labor and Delivery in labor or for induction of labor with a fetus in cephalic presentation.
Who cannot join
- Exclusion criteria for this study include women with multifetal gestations, fetus in breech or transverse position, musculoskeletal abnormalities in the mother which might preclude them from proper positioning on the peanut ball.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
This study is designed as a prospective, randomized controlled trial that will compare the use of the peanut exercise ball in laboring patients compared with no use of the exercise ball. We hypothesize that use of the peanut ball decreases the incidence of cesarean section.
Read the detailed description
This study is designed as a prospective, randomized controlled trial that will compare the use of the peanut exercise ball in laboring patients compared with no use of the exercise ball. The investigators plan to include all pregnant women over the age of 18 who present to VCU Labor and Delivery in labor or for induction of labor with a fetus in cephalic presentation. They will have the peanut shaped exercise ball placed between the maternal legs in either the supine or upright position during labor. The peanut ball can be seen at this link, which is similar to the ball the investigators use on Labor and Delivery (http://www.amazon.com/Isokinetics-Inc-Brand-Peanut-Ball/dp/B0026N2JWG). We use various sizes of this durable, non-latex exercise ball. There is a small size (for women ,5'3" that is 40inches), medium size for women 5'3" to 5'"7 (50inches) and a large for women >5'7" (60inches). The length of time using the peanut ball will be quantified by charting in OB TraceVue software (which is currently standard practice with peanut ball use).
Each patient will be assigned a number in order starting at 1. Each patient will then be randomized using a block randomization scheme with pre-assigned envelopes in the labor and delivery team room starting at number 1. Each participant will have an envelope pulled in order of their number assignment when admitted to labor and delivery and consent obtained.
Exclusion criteria for this study include women with multifetal gestations, fetus in breech or transverse position, musculoskeletal abnormalities in the mother which might preclude them from proper positioning on the peanut ball.
This study is a prospective, two-armed randomized controlled trial (RCT) with interim analyses planned after 50% and 75% of the patients have completed the study. Using nTerim 2.0, 2000 total subjects (1000 per group) will be needed to have a study powered at 80% to detect a difference in the C-section rate if the treatment and control groups have C-section rates of 11.25% and 15%, respectively, using a one-sided test at the 0.05 level. The primary outcome will be the observed incidence of cesarean section delivery in the two populations of randomized, laboring women.
Bayesian stopping rules, for expected success and futility, are to be added to this study. Bayesian stopping rules have advantages over other traditional types of interim analyses. Specifically, they can be used for Bayesian or frequentist (e.g. traditional) trial designs without requiring the statistical analysis or study design to be altered. Additionally, the study is not penalized for additional 'looks' at the data, as is the case in traditional interim analyses. A drawback of this strategy is that the methods used to analyze the data (e.g. frequentist and Bayesian) have different interpretations and may not come to the same conclusion.
The investigators plan on conducting three interim analyses, after sample sizes of 500, 1000, and 1500 have been achieved. At each look, the predicted probability of trial success, assuming the full 2004 subjects are accrued, will be calculated. The predictive probability is defined as the probability that the unanticipated C-section rate for the Peanut Ball (PB) group is lower than that of the control (C), as measured assuming the full 2004 subjects are accrued and conditional on the data obtained from the subjects that the study has already accrued. If this probability is small (e.g. < 0.10), then the study will stop for futility. If the predicted probability with the current sample size is large, meaning it is likely that the Peanut ball group has a lower unanticipated C-section rate, then the study will be stopped for expected success. Predicted probabilities of 0.95, 0.90, and 0.90 for the interim analyses at 500, 1000, and 1500 subjects will be used to determine expected success, respectively. If neither of these conditions are met, the study will continue to accrue subjects until a maximum of 2004 subjects.
The calculation of the predictive probabilities are slightly different for futility and trial success. For the futility analysis, the posterior distribution of an unanticipated C-section will be will be specified as a beta distribution with Xig +1 and Nig - Xig +1 degrees of freedom (Beta(Xig +1, Nig - Xig +1)), where Xig denotes the total number of unanticipated C-sections for the group g (PB, C) for assessment i (1,2,3) from the total sample size in each group (Nig). This distribution comes from the commonly used beta-binomial posterior distribution using and uninformative (uniform) prior. For each treatment group and interim analysis, an unanticipated C-section rate will be simulated from the respective posterior distribution (pigj) and, based on this simulated value, a simulated number of additional unanticipated C-sections will be calculated. This process will repeat itself 10,000 times, and for each iteration, the total estimated rate of unanticipated C-sections will be calculated. The posterior probability for futility, P(pi,PB+0.0375<pi,C) after accruing the total 2004 subjects will be calculated by summing up the instances where pi,PBj+0.0375<pi,Cj, where pi,gj is the predictive probability of an unanticipated C-section after full enrollment for simulation j. The offset, 0.0375, is calculated from the hypothesized difference from the original power analysis (0.15-0.1125=0.0375)
A similar process will be used for efficacy, however, the predictive probability will be calculated from the inequality P(pi,PB<pi,C).
The investigators will collect the data, perform data entry and review charts to ensure accuracy of information. Medical Record Numbers will be collected with data collection to ensure that we can adequately review the chart of the patient for data collection.The investigators will also collect information on mode of delivery (vaginal, operative vaginal, csection), gravidity, parity, age, bmi, epidural anesthesia (yes/no), induction vs spontaneous labor, gestational age at delivery, dilation at admission, fetal position at delivery, birth weight, cord ph, Apgars, dystocia, length of active phase of labor and second stage of labor.
- Conditions
- Cesarean Section
- Being tested
- Peanut Exercise Ball
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Peanut Exercise BallDevice
A Peanut shaped exercise ball.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Control | No intervention | Subjects who are randomized to to the control group will labor without the use of the peanut ball in labor. |
| Experimental/Peanut Ball | Experimental | Subjects randomized to the intervention (peanut ball) arm will have the peanut ball planed between their upper legs for at least 30minutes during their labor. Time on the peanut ball will be quantified by the bedside nursing staff. Receives: Device: Peanut Exercise Ball |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Cesarean Section
Vaginal birth versus cesarean section
Measured: Labor outcome during hospitalization for labor (1-3 days)
Secondary outcomes (4)
Fetal APGAR Scores
1 minute and 5minute APGAR scores
Measured: Delivery to 5 minutes following delivery
Labor Duration
Time of active phase of labor and time of second stage of labor
Measured: Labor (1-3days)
Fetal cord Ph
Cord Ph obtained immediately following delivery
Measured: Immediately following delivery
Mode of vaginal delivery
Spontaneous versus operative vaginal delivery with forceps or vacuum
Measured: Delivery
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted14 Sep 2016 (estimated)
- Study startAug 2016
- Primary completion10 Apr 2019
- Study completion10 Apr 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Cesarean SectionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
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
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 316 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Virginia Commonwealth University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Sarah H Milton, MD, Principal investigator, Virginia Commonwealth University Health System
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02899260
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- HM20006455
- Status last verified
- Sep 2020
- First submitted
- 8 Sep 2016
- Last updated
- 22 Sep 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: Plan to make individual data available on clinical trials.gov at conclusion of study.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 22 Sep 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Using the Peanut Exercise Ball to Reduce Cesarean Section Rates: A Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02899260
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- HM20006455
- Conditions
- Cesarean Section
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 316 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Virginia Commonwealth UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Aug 2016
- Primary completion
- 10 Apr 2019 (actual)
- Study completion
- 10 Apr 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 14 Sep 2016 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study is designed as a prospective, randomized controlled trial that will compare the use of the peanut exercise ball in laboring patients compared with no use of the exercise ball. We hypothesize that use of the peanut ball decreases the incidence of cesarean section.
Detailed description
This study is designed as a prospective, randomized controlled trial that will compare the use of the peanut exercise ball in laboring patients compared with no use of the exercise ball. The investigators plan to include all pregnant women over the age of 18 who present to VCU Labor and Delivery in labor or for induction of labor with a fetus in cephalic presentation. They will have the peanut shaped exercise ball placed between the maternal legs in either the supine or upright position during labor. The peanut ball can be seen at this link, which is similar to the ball the investigators use on Labor and Delivery (http://www.amazon.com/Isokinetics-Inc-Brand-Peanut-Ball/dp/B0026N2JWG). We use various sizes of this durable, non-latex exercise ball. There is a small size (for women ,5'3" that is 40inches), medium size for women 5'3" to 5'"7 (50inches) and a large for women >5'7" (60inches). The length of time using the peanut ball will be quantified by charting in OB TraceVue software (which is currently standard practice with peanut ball use).
Each patient will be assigned a number in order starting at 1. Each patient will then be randomized using a block randomization scheme with pre-assigned envelopes in the labor and delivery team room starting at number 1. Each participant will have an envelope pulled in order of their number assignment when admitted to labor and delivery and consent obtained.
Exclusion criteria for this study include women with multifetal gestations, fetus in breech or transverse position, musculoskeletal abnormalities in the mother which might preclude them from proper positioning on the peanut ball.
This study is a prospective, two-armed randomized controlled trial (RCT) with interim analyses planned after 50% and 75% of the patients have completed the study. Using nTerim 2.0, 2000 total subjects (1000 per group) will be needed to have a study powered at 80% to detect a difference in the C-section rate if the treatment and control groups have C-section rates of 11.25% and 15%, respectively, using a one-sided test at the 0.05 level. The primary outcome will be the observed incidence of cesarean section delivery in the two populations of randomized, laboring women.
Bayesian stopping rules, for expected success and futility, are to be added to this study. Bayesian stopping rules have advantages over other traditional types of interim analyses. Specifically, they can be used for Bayesian or frequentist (e.g. traditional) trial designs without requiring the statistical analysis or study design to be altered. Additionally, the study is not penalized for additional 'looks' at the data, as is the case in traditional interim analyses. A drawback of this strategy is that the methods used to analyze the data (e.g. frequentist and Bayesian) have different interpretations and may not come to the same conclusion.
The investigators plan on conducting three interim analyses, after sample sizes of 500, 1000, and 1500 have been achieved. At each look, the predicted probability of trial success, assuming the full 2004 subjects are accrued, will be calculated. The predictive probability is defined as the probability that the unanticipated C-section rate for the Peanut Ball (PB) group is lower than that of the control (C), as measured assuming the full 2004 subjects are accrued and conditional on the data obtained from the subjects that the study has already accrued. If this probability is small (e.g. < 0.10), then the study will stop for futility. If the predicted probability with the current sample size is large, meaning it is likely that the Peanut ball group has a lower unanticipated C-section rate, then the study will be stopped for expected success. Predicted probabilities of 0.95, 0.90, and 0.90 for the interim analyses at 500, 1000, and 1500 subjects will be used to determine expected success, respectively. If neither of these conditions are met, the study will continue to accrue subjects until a maximum of 2004 subjects.
The calculation of the predictive probabilities are slightly different for futility and trial success. For the futility analysis, the posterior distribution of an unanticipated C-section will be will be specified as a beta distribution with Xig +1 and Nig - Xig +1 degrees of freedom (Beta(Xig +1, Nig - Xig +1)), where Xig denotes the total number of unanticipated C-sections for the group g (PB, C) for assessment i (1,2,3) from the total sample size in each group (Nig). This distribution comes from the commonly used beta-binomial posterior distribution using and uninformative (uniform) prior. For each treatment group and interim analysis, an unanticipated C-section rate will be simulated from the respective posterior distribution (pigj) and, based on this simulated value, a simulated number of additional unanticipated C-sections will be calculated. This process will repeat itself 10,000 times, and for each iteration, the total estimated rate of unanticipated C-sections will be calculated. The posterior probability for futility, P(pi,PB+0.0375<pi,C) after accruing the total 2004 subjects will be calculated by summing up the instances where pi,PBj+0.0375<pi,Cj, where pi,gj is the predictive probability of an unanticipated C-section after full enrollment for simulation j. The offset, 0.0375, is calculated from the hypothesized difference from the original power analysis (0.15-0.1125=0.0375)
A similar process will be used for efficacy, however, the predictive probability will be calculated from the inequality P(pi,PB<pi,C).
The investigators will collect the data, perform data entry and review charts to ensure accuracy of information. Medical Record Numbers will be collected with data collection to ensure that we can adequately review the chart of the patient for data collection.The investigators will also collect information on mode of delivery (vaginal, operative vaginal, csection), gravidity, parity, age, bmi, epidural anesthesia (yes/no), induction vs spontaneous labor, gestational age at delivery, dilation at admission, fetal position at delivery, birth weight, cord ph, Apgars, dystocia, length of active phase of labor and second stage of labor.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Control | No intervention | –Subjects who are randomized to to the control group will labor without the use of the peanut ball in labor. |
| Experimental/Peanut Ball | Experimental | Device: Peanut Exercise BallSubjects randomized to the intervention (peanut ball) arm will have the peanut ball planed between their upper legs for at least 30minutes during their labor. Time on the peanut ball will be quantified by the bedside nursing staff. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Inclusion Criteria for this study include pregnant women over the age of 18 who present to VCU Labor and Delivery in labor or for induction of labor with a fetus in cephalic presentation.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Exclusion criteria for this study include women with multifetal gestations, fetus in breech or transverse position, musculoskeletal abnormalities in the mother which might preclude them from proper positioning on the peanut ball.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Peanut Exercise BallA Peanut shaped exercise ball. | Device | Experimental/Peanut Ball |
Primary outcome
Cesarean Section
Time frame: Labor outcome during hospitalization for labor (1-3 days)
Vaginal birth versus cesarean section
4 secondary outcomes
Fetal APGAR Scores
Time frame: Delivery to 5 minutes following delivery
Labor Duration
Time frame: Labor (1-3days)
Fetal cord Ph
Time frame: Immediately following delivery
Mode of vaginal delivery
Time frame: Delivery
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 22 Sep 2020.
- Peanut Ball ExampleLink provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. Plan to make individual data available on clinical trials.gov at conclusion of study.
Related trials for Cesarean Section
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Stress Ball Use on Perioperative Anxiety and Postoperative Pain in Parturients Undergoing Cesarean Section
Postoperative Pain
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Sacral Erector Spinae Plane Block on Quality of Recovery After Cesarean Delivery: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial
Pain, Postoperative Pain
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
OB VEGA-Phenylephrine vs Norepinephrine Outcomes
Hypotension During Surgery, Cesarean Birth
Recruiting
Hyperangulated vs. Macintosh Style Blades for Intubation in Obstetric Patients
Obstetric, Cesarean Birth
RecruitingObservational study
The Role of Preoperative Internal Jugular Vein Collapsibility and Perfusion Index in Predicting Hypotension After Spinal Anesthesia in Elective Cesarean Sections: A Prospective Observational Study
Postspinal Hypotension, Cesarean Birth
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Sarah H Milton, MD principal investigator
Virginia Commonwealth University Health System
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Peanut Exercise Ball in people with Cesarean Section, run by Virginia Commonwealth University at 1 site in United States.
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 1 inclusion and 1 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 22 Sep 2020. 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 United States. 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?
Cesarean Section (time frame: Labor outcome during hospitalization for labor (1-3 days)). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 22 Sep 2020.