• Saima Chaudhary
  • Rubina Farrukh
  • Asma Dar
  • Shamsa Humayun


Background: Primigravidas with unengaged foetal head at term should be regarded as high riskcases. It is seen that nuglliparous women with the floating foetal head demonstrate higher rates ofcaesarean section than those with dipping or engaged head in early labour. These cases should beregarded as high risk and identified early and should be referred to a tertiary care centre where goodfacilities for operative delivery are available. The present study was undertaken to determine theoutcome of labour in nulliparous women with unengaged head and compare it with those whopresent with engaged head at term as a case control study. The objective of the study was toenumerate the outcome of labour in nulliparous women presenting with unengaged head at term andcompare it with those who present with engaged head in early active labour. Methods: It was a casecontrol study, completed in 11 months, conducted in Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, SirGanga Ram Hospital, Lahore. 300 women were selected by convenience sampling. 150 nulliparouswomen who presented with unengaged head in early active labour were taken as cases, out which 2women left against medical advice with their medical records so data was missing leaving 148patients in this group. While 150 nulliparous women who presented with engaged head were taken ascontrols. Results: C-section rates was significantly found to be more in unengaged group being16.89%, compared with 5.33% in engaged group (p=0.000). Most of C-sections were carried out dueto failed progress of labour (48%). Patients with unengaged foetal head had significantly lowerAPGAR scores at 1 (p< 0.002) and 5 min (0.003) and higher mean birth weights (p= 0.002).Casesalso had significantly longer 1st (p=0.0001) and 2nd stage (p=0.004) of labour. Conclusion: Engagedvertex at the onset of active labour is associated with a lower risk of caesarean delivery in nulliparouswomen. Patients with unengaged vertex are at higher risk for caesarean delivery due to arrestdisorders. In addition to the higher caesarean rate patients with unengaged vertex are at risk ofhaving lower foetal APGAR scores and higher mean birth weights of newborns.Key words: labour outcome, nullipara, term pregnancy, unengaged vertex


Qureshi NS, Saleem F, Riaz S. Primigravida with non engaged

foetal head at term: an audit of delivery outcome. Ann KE Med

Coll 1999;5:177–9.

Murphy K, Shah L, Cohen WR. Labour and delivery in

nulliparous women who present with an unengaged foetal head. J

Perinatal 1998;18:122–5.

Cunningham FG, MacDonald PC, Gant NF, Leveno KJ, Gilstrap

LC, Hankins GDV, Clark SL. Williams Obstetrics. 20th ed.

Stanford: Connecticut: Appleton & Lange;1997.

Diegmann EK, Chez RA, Danclair WG. Station in early labour in

nulliparous women at term. J Nurse Midurifery 1995;40:382–5.

Shin KS, Brubaker KL, Ackerson LM. Risk of Cesarean

delivery in nulliparous women at greater than 41 weeks

gestational age with an unengaged vertex. Am J Obstet

Gynaecol 2004;190:129–34.

Falzone S, Chauhan SP, Mobley JA, Berg TG, Sherline DM,

Devoe LD. Unengaged Vertex in nulliparous women in active

labour. A risk factor for cesarean delivery. J Reprod Med


Wilkes PT, Wolf DM, Kronbach DW, Kunze N, Gibbas RS.

Risk factors for cesarean delivery at presentation of nulliparous

patients in labour. Obstet Gynecol 2003;102:1352–7.

American college of obstetricians and gynaecologists. Evaluation

of caesarean delivery. Washington DC: American college of

obstetricians and gynaecologists; 2000.

Lilford RJ, van Coeverden de Groot HA, Moore PJ, Bingham P.

The relative risks of caesarean section (intrapartum and elective)

and vaginal delivery:A detailed analysis to exclude the effects of

medical disorders and acute pre-existing physiological

disturbances. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1990;97:883–92.

Gibbs RS. Clinical risk factors for puerperal infection. Obstet

Gynaecol 1980;55:178S–84S.

Roshan fekr D, Blakemore Kj, Lee j, Hueppchen NA, Witter FR.

Station at onset of active labour in nulliparous patients and risk of

cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 1999;93:329–31.

Saropala N, Chaturachinda K. The relationship between head

level on admission and mode of delivery in primigravidae. J Med

Assoc Thai 1993;76:60–2.

Handa VL, Laros RK. Active – phase arrest in labour: predictors

of cesarean delivery in a nulliparous population. Obstet Gynecol


Debby A, Rotmensh S, Girtler O,Sadan O, Golan A, Glezerman

M.Clinical significance of floating foetal head in nulliparous

women in labour. J Reprod Med 2003;48:37–40.

Friedman EA, Sachtleben MR. Station of the foetal presenting

part II:Effect on course of labour. Am J Obstet Gynaecol


Takahasi K, Suzuki K. Incidence and significance of unengaged

foetal head in nulliparas I early labour. Int J Biol Res Pregnancy


Briggs ND. Engagement of the foetal head in negro primigravida.

Br J Obstet Gynecol 1981;88:1086–9.

Kushtagi P. Pattern of descent of foetal head in normal labour. J

Indian Med Assoc 1995;93:336–9.

Sheiner E, Levy A, Feinstein U, Hersh Kovitz R, Hallak M,

Mazor M. Obstetric risk factors for failure to progress in the first

versus the second stage of labour. J Maternal Neonatal Med


Friedman EA, Sachtleben. Station of the foetal presenting part.vi.

Arrest of descent in nulliparas. Obstet & Gynecol 1976;47:129–36.