Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Induction of Labour

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Contemporary Obstetrics and Gynecology for Developing Countries

  • 1269 Accesses

Abstract

Over recent decades, more and more pregnant women around the world have undergone induction of labour (IOL). The practice is not without risk and should be guided by using the best evidence to optimise maternal outcomes. In developed countries, the proportion of infants delivered at term following induction of labour can be as high as one in four deliveries. African countries tended to have lower rates of induction of labour (lowest: Niger, 1.4%) compared with Asian and Latin American countries (highest: Sri Lanka, 35.5%). This chapter reviews in detail the indications, timing, assessment and methods of induction of labour reviewing the current evidence and providing recommendations for best practice. The outcome and risks of induction of labour are discussed in detail and ways to minimise risks in a resource-poor setting. It also explores specific circumstances including patients with intrauterine foetal death, previous caesarean section and the diagnosis and management of failed induction. The process of induction of labour carries some risks to both mother and foetus, and it is recommended that these risks be weighed against the benefits. It is also recommended that continued education and training is maintained in this field to provide the best evidence-based practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. NHS Digital. NHS Maternity Statistics, England 2016–17. November 09, 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Osterman MJK, Martin JA. Recent declines in induction of labor by gestational age. NCHS Data Brief. 2014;155:1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Inducing Labour Inducing Labour Clinical Guideline. 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Boulvain M, Irion O, Dowswell T, Thornton JG. Induction of labour at or near term for suspected fetal macrosomia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;2016(5) https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000938.pub2.

  5. Sanchez-Ramos L, Bernstein S, Kaunitz AM. Expectant management versus labor induction for suspected fetal macrosomia. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;100(5, Part 1):997–1002. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006250-200211000-00030.

  6. American College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. fetal Macrosomia.Practice Bulletin No. 173. Obstet Gynecol. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000001767.

  7. Gülmezoglu AM, Crowther CA, Middleton P. Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD004945. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004945.pub2.

  8. Cartwright A. The dignity of labour?: A study of childbearing and induction. London: Tavistock Publications, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Benoit C, Oakley A. The captured womb: a history of the medical care of pregnant women. Can J Sociol/Cah Can Sociol. 2006; https://doi.org/10.2307/3340861.

  10. Out JJ, Vierhout ME, Verhage F, Duivenvoorden HJ, Wallenburg HCS. Characteristics and motives of women choosing elective induction of labour. J Psychosom Res. 1986; https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3999(86)90016-4.

  11. Ehrenthal DB, Hoffman MK, Jiang X, Ostrum G. Neonatal outcomes after implementation of guidelines limiting elective delivery before 39 weeks of gestation. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2012;67(3):135–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/OGX.0b013e318249febc.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Mishanina E, Rogozinska E, Thatthi T, Uddin-Khan R, Khan KS, Meads C. Use of labour induction and risk of cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. CMAJ. 2014;186(9):665–73. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.130925.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Rosenstein MG, Cheng YW, Snowden JM, Nicholson JM, Caughey AB. Risk of stillbirth and infant death stratified by gestational age. Obstet Gynecol. 2012; https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e31825bd286.

  14. Grobman WA. Costs of elective induction of labor. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2014; https://doi.org/10.1097/GRF.0000000000000022.

  15. Eisenberg Centre at Oregon Health & Science University. Elective Induction of Labor: Safety and Harms. 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Reddy UM, Ko CW, Willinger M. Maternal age and the risk of stillbirth throughout pregnancy in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2006.06.019.

  17. Dhanjal M, Kenyon A. Scientific Impact Paper No. 34 – Induction of Labour at Term in Older Mothers.; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Page JM, Snowden JM, Cheng YW, Doss AE, Rosenstein MG, Caughey AB. The risk of stillbirth and infant death by each additional week of expectant management stratified by maternal age. Am J Obstetr Gynaecol. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2013.05.045.

  19. Walker KF, Bugg GJ, Macpherson M, et al. Randomised trial of labor induction in women 35 years of age or older. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2016; https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ogx.0000488681.91547.73.

  20. American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. ACOG committee opinion no. 561: Nonmedically indicated early-term deliveries. Obstet Gynecol. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000428649.57622.a7.

  21. Main EK. New perinatal quality measures from the National Quality Forum, the joint commission and the leapfrog group. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2009; https://doi.org/10.1097/gco.0b013e328332d1b0.

  22. American College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Patient Safety Checklist no. 5: scheduling induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2011;118(6):1473–1474. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e318240d429.

  23. Bishop EH. Pelvic scoring for elective induction. Obstet Gynecol. 1964;24:266–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kolkman DGE, Verhoeven CJM, Brinkhorst SJ, et al. The Bishop score as a predictor of labor induction success: a systematic review. Am J Perinatol. 2013;30(8):625–30. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1331024.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Vaknin Z, Kurzweil Y, Sherman D. Foley catheter balloon vs locally applied prostaglandins for cervical ripening and labor induction: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010;203(5):418–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2010.04.038.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Fox N, Saltzman D, Roman A, Klauser C, Moshier E, Rebarber A. Intravaginal misoprostol versus Foley catheter for labour induction: a meta-analysis. BJOG An Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2011;118(6):647–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.02905.x.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Jozwiak M, Bloemenkamp KW, Kelly AJ, Mol BWJ, Irion O, Boulvain M. Mechanical methods for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012; https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001233.pub2.

  28. McMaster K, Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM. Evaluation of a Transcervical Foley catheter as a source of infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126(3):539–51. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000001002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Yang F, Huang S, Long Y, Huang L. Double-balloon versus single-balloon catheter for cervical ripening and labor induction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2018;44(1):27–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/jog.13551.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Salim R, Schwartz N, Zafran N, Zuarez-Easton S, Garmi G, Romano S. Comparison of single- and double-balloon catheters for labor induction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. J Perinatol. 2018;38(3):217–25. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41372-017-0005-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Schoen CN, Saccone G, Backley S, et al. Increased single-balloon Foley catheter volume for induction of labor and time to delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2018;97(9):1051–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/aogs.13353.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Schoen CN, Grant G, Berghella V, Hoffman MK, Sciscione A. Intracervical Foley catheter with and without oxytocin for labor induction. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;129(6):1046–53. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000002032.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Pettker CM, Pocock SB, Smok DP, Lee SM, Devine PC. Transcervical Foley catheter with and without oxytocin for cervical ripening. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111(6):1320–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e31817615a0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Gelber S, Sciscione A. Mechanical methods of cervical ripening and labor induction. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2006;49(3):642–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. WHO Recommendations for Induction of Labour.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Gilson GJ, Russell DJ, Izquierdo LA, Qualls CR, Curet LB. A prospective randomised evaluation of a hygroscopic cervical dilator, Dilapan, in the preinduction ripening of patients undergoing induction of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175(1):145–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9378(96)70264-8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Saad A, Villareal J, Eid J, et al. 21: a randomised controlled trial of pre-induction cervical ripening comparing dilapan-s versus Foley balloon (DILAFOL trial). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2018.11.024.

  38. Levine LD, Downes KL, Elovitz MA, Parry S, Sammel MD, Srinivas SK. Mechanical and pharmacologic methods of labor induction: a randomised controlled trial. Obstetr Gynaecol. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000001778.

  39. Avdiyovski H, Haith-Cooper M, Scally A. Membrane sweeping at term to promote spontaneous labour and reduce the likelihood of a formal induction of labour for postmaturity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Obstet Gynaecol (Lahore). 2019; https://doi.org/10.1080/01443615.2018.1467388.

  40. Yount SM, Lassiter N. The pharmacology of prostaglandins for induction of labor. J Midwifery Women’s Heal. 2013; https://doi.org/10.1111/jmwh.12022.

  41. Boulvain M, Kelly AJ, Irion O. Intracervical prostaglandins for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008; https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006971.

  42. Kelly AJ, Malik S, Smith L, Kavanagh J, Thomas J. Vaginal prostaglandin (PGE2 and PGF2a) for induction of labour at term. In: Kelly AJ, editor. Cochrane database of systematic reviews. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2009. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003101.pub2.

  43. Taher SE, Inder JW, Soltan SA, Eliahoo J, Edmonds DK, Bennett PR. Prostaglandin E2 vaginal gel or tablets for the induction of labour at term: a randomised controlled trial. BJOG An Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2011; https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.02901.x.

  44. WHO Reproductive Health Library. World Health Organisation recommendation on use of vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour. Geneva; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Tang J, Kapp N, Dragoman M, de Souza JP. WHO recommendations for misoprostol use for obstetric and gynaecologic indications. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2013;121(2):186–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2012.12.009.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Alfirevic Z, Aflaifel N, Weeks A. Oral misoprostol for induction of labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Cochrane Libr. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001338.pub4.

  47. Langenegger EJ, Odendaal HJ, Grové D. Oral misoprostol versus intracervical dinoprostone for induction of labor. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2005; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2004.12.005.

  48. Bricker L, Peden H, Tomlinson A, et al. Titrated low-dose vaginal and/or oral misoprostol to induce labour for prelabour membrane rupture: a randomised trial. BJOG An Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2008;115(12):1503–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2008.01890.x.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Wing DA, Brown R, Plante LA, Miller H, Rugarn O, Powers BL. Misoprostol vaginal insert and time to vaginal delivery: a randomised controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e31829a2dd6

  50. Alfirevic Z, Kelly AJ, Dowswell T. Intravenous oxytocin alone for cervical ripening and induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;4:CD003246. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003246.pub2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Alfirevic Z, Keeney E, Dowswell T, et al. Which method is best for the induction of labour? A systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Technol Assess (Rockv). 2016;20(65):1–584. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta20650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Calderyro-Barcia RSJ. The response of human uterus to oxytocin throughout pregnancy. In: Calderyro-Barcia R, Heller H, editor. Oxytocin. London: Pergamon Press; 1959.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Fuchs AR, Fuchs F, Husslein P, Soloff MS. Oxytocin receptors in the human uterus during pregnancy and parturition. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1984;150(6):734–41.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Arrowsmith S, Wray S. Oxytocin: its mechanism of action and receptor Signalling in the myometrium. J Neuroendocrinol. 2014;26(6):356–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/jne.12154.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Thornton S, Davison JM, Baylis PH. Plasma oxytocin during the first and second stages of spontaneous human labour. Acta Endocrinol. 1992;126(5):425–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Grotegut CA, Ngan E, Garrett ME, Miranda ML, Ashley-Koch AE, Swamy GK. The association of single-nucleotide polymorphisms in the oxytocin receptor and G protein-coupled receptor kinase 6 (GRK6) genes with oxytocin dosing requirements and labor outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217(3):367.e1–e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.05.023.

  57. Rydén G, Sjöholm I. The metabolism of oxytocin in pregnant and non-pregnant women. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand Suppl. 1971;9(Suppl 9):37.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Seitchik J, Amico J, Robinson AG, Castillo M. Oxytocin augmentation of dysfunctional labor. IV. Oxytocin pharmacokinetics. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1984;150(3):225–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Hayes EJ, Weinstein L. Improving patient safety and uniformity of care by a standardised regimen for the use of oxytocin. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;198(6):622.e1–e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2008.01.039.

  60. Clark S, Belfort M, Saade G, et al. Implementation of a conservative checklist-based protocol for oxytocin administration: maternal and newborn outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197(5):480.e1–e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2007.08.026.

  61. Freeman RK, Nageotte M. A protocol for use of oxytocin. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2007;197(5):445–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2007.08.025.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 106: intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring: nomenclature, interpretation, and general management principles. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(1):192–202. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181aef106.

  63. Kehl S, Weiss C, Rath W. Balloon catheters for induction of labor at term after previous cesarean section: a systematic review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016;204:44–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.07.505.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Jozwiak M, Dodd JM. Methods of term labour induction for women with a previous caesarean section. In: Jozwiak M, editor. Cochrane database of systematic reviews. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2013:CD009792. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009792.pub2

  65. Grobman WA, Gilbert S, Landon MB, et al. Outcomes of induction of labor after one prior cesarean. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109(2, Part 1):262–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000254169.49346.e9.

  66. Miller ES, Grobman WA. Obstetric outcomes associated with induction of labor after 2 prior cesarean deliveries. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213(1):89.e1–e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2015.02.003.

  67. Cunningham FG, Bangdiwala SI, Brown SS, et al. NIH consensus development conference draft statement on vaginal birth after cesarean: new insights. NIH Consens State Sci Statements. 2010;27(3):1–42.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Palatnik A, Grobman WA. Induction of labor versus expectant management for women with a prior cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212(3):358.e1–e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2015.01.026.

  69. Harper LM, Cahill AG, Boslaugh S, et al. Association of induction of labor and uterine rupture in women attempting vaginal birth after cesarean: a survival analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(1):51.e1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2011.09.022.

  70. Landon MB, Hauth JC, Leveno KJ, et al. Maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with a trial of labor after prior cesarean delivery. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(25):2581–9. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa040405.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. From the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention. Use of hospital discharge data to monitor uterine rupture–Massachusetts, 1990–1997. JAMA. 2000;283(16):2098–100.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Wing DA, Lovett K, Paul RH. Disruption of prior uterine incision following misoprostol for labor induction in women with previous cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 1998;91(5 Pt 2):828–30.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Gómez Ponce de León R, Wing D, Fiala C. Misoprostol for intrauterine fetal death. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2007;99(Suppl 2):S190–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2007.09.010.

  74. Sanchez-Ramos L, Gaudier FL, Kaunitz AM. Cervical ripening and labor induction after previous cesarean delivery. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2000;43(3):513–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Plaut MM, Schwartz ML, Lubarsky SL. Uterine rupture associated with the use of misoprostol in the gravid patient with a previous cesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999;180(6 Pt 1):1535–42.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Goldstein DP, Reid DE. Circulating fibrinolytic activity--a precursor of hypofibrinogenemia following fetal death in utero. Obstet Gynecol. 1963;22:174–80.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Silver RM. Fetal death. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109(1):153–67. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000248537.89739.96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Goldstein D, Johnson J, Gynaecology DR-O&, 1963 undefined. Management of intrauterine fetal death. journals.lww.com.

  79. Parasnis H, Raje B, Hinduja IN. Relevance of plasma fibrinogen estimation in obstetric complications. J Postgrad Med. 38(4):183–5.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Wagaarachchi PT, Ashok PW, Narvekar NN, Smith NC, Templeton A. Medical management of late intrauterine death using a combination of mifepristone and misoprostol. BJOG. 2002;109(4):443–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Dodd JM, Crowther CA. Misoprostol for induction of labour to terminate pregnancy in the second or third trimester for women with a fetal anomaly or after intrauterine fetal death. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;4:CD004901. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004901.pub2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Late Intrauterine Fetal Death and Stillbirth Green-Top Guideline No. 55.; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Macones GA, Cahill A, Pare E, et al. Obstetric outcomes in women with two prior cesarean deliveries: is vaginal birth after cesarean delivery a viable option? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;192(4):1223–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2004.12.082.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Spong CY, Berghella V, Wenstrom KD, Mercer BM, Saade GR. Preventing the first cesarean delivery: summary of a joint Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and American College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Workshop. Obstet Gynecol. 2012;120(5):1181–93. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182704880.

  85. American College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Safe Prevention of the Primary Cesarean Delivery: Obstetric care consensus no. 1: Safe prevention of the primary Cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123(3):693–711. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000444441.04111.1d. PMID: 24553167.

  86. Kawakita T, Reddy UM, Iqbal SN, et al. Duration of oxytocin and rupture of the membranes before diagnosing a failed induction of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(2):373–80. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000001527.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Rouse DJ, Owen J, Hauth JC. Criteria for failed labor induction: prospective evaluation of a standardised protocol. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;96(5 Pt 1):671–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Rouse DJ, Weiner SJ, Bloom SL, Varner MW, Spong CY, et al. Failed labor induction: toward an objective diagnosis. Obstet Gynecol. 2011; https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e318207887a.

  89. Simon CE, Grobman WA. When has an induction failed? Obstet Gynecol. 2005; https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000157437.10998.e7.

  90. Grobman WA, Bailit J, Lai Y, et al. Defining failed induction of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2018;218(1):122.e1–e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.11.556.

  91. Kelly AJ, Alfirevic Z, Ghosh A. Outpatient versus inpatient induction of labour for improving birth outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;11:CD007372. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007372.pub3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Guid Oei S, Jongmans L, Mol BWJ. Randomised trial of administration of prostaglandin E2 gel for induction of labor in the morning or the evening. J Perinat Med. 2000;28(1):20–5. https://doi.org/10.1515/JPM.2000.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Al Wakra Hospital, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar

    Osric Banfegha Navti

  2. Women’s Wellness and Research Centre, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar

    Victor N. Chilaka

Authors
  1. Osric Banfegha Navti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Victor N. Chilaka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Osric Banfegha Navti .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Centre of Excellence in Reproductive Health Innovation, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Benin, Benin City, Nigeria

    Friday Okonofua

  2. College of Health Sciences, Chicago State University, Chicago, IL, USA

    Joseph A. Balogun

  3. Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA

    Kunle Odunsi

  4. Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Weil Cornell Medicine, Doha, Qatar

    Victor N. Chilaka

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Navti, O.B., Chilaka, V.N. (2021). Induction of Labour. In: Okonofua, F., Balogun, J.A., Odunsi, K., Chilaka, V.N. (eds) Contemporary Obstetrics and Gynecology for Developing Countries . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-75385-6_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-75385-6_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-75384-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-75385-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation