Background: Unengaged fetal head during Caesarean section often complicates the delivery process. This study aimed to compare the Vectis method versus the manual method in terms of operative and neonatal outcomes, maternal experiences, and professional preferences.

Methods: We conducted a comparative study involving 80 women undergoing Caesarean section with unengaged fetal heads. The study population was divided into two groups: the Vectis group and the manual extraction group, with 40 participants in each group.

Results: The use of the Vectis method resulted in significantly reduced mean uterine incision to extraction time (64.60±36.86 seconds) as opposed to the manual method (83.08±35.32 seconds, p=0.025). The maternal experience was significantly better in the Vectis group, with all participants (100%) reporting no discomfort during extraction, unlike the manual group where all participants reported discomfort (p<0.001). Surgeons found extraction easier in 77.5% of cases with the Vectis method, in contrast to 55% in the manual method (p=0.639). Most anaesthetists (80%) expressed a preference for the Vectis method (p=0.963). Neonatal outcomes were similar between the groups, with comparable APGAR scores at 1 minute (Vectis: 7.30±0.72; Manual: 6.73±0.55; p=0.001) and 5 minutes (Vectis: 8.83±0.55; Manual: 8.65±0.48; p=0.496), and no neonatal injuries reported in either group.

Conclusion: The Vectis method of fetal head extraction during Caesarean section offers potential advantages over the manual method, including shorter extraction times, improved maternal experience, and professional preference, without impacting neonatal outcomes.