{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013097072419106317, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.27536231884058, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Shoulder dystocia from a legal standpoint].

Even though a shoulder dystocia occurs very seldom it plays an important part in obstetrical medical opinions since it is quite often associated with infant plexus brachialis injuries. In legal medical discussions it is necessary to determine whether there were certain antepartal risks, if diagnosis and therapy were carried out correctly and whether a shoulder dystocia resp. plexus brachialis injury could have been prevented. In general one is looking for answers to prevent both serious complications. In the past a great number of articles were published referring to these answers. Especially in Anglo-American literature of the last few years one can find more and more indications that a clear cause-effect between shoulder dystocia and plexus brachialis injuries does not exist in every case. Also the value of typical or historical factors concerning association between the two are criticised in different publications. In addition the therapy strategies for shoulder dystocia treatments are momentarily analyzed in scientific discussions. Which treatment should be used first? Which ones are actually effective or do they even increase the risk of plexus brachialis injuries? Answers to these questions are given in the following abstract.