Maternal outcome monitoring: induction of labor versus spontaneous onset of labor—a retrospective data analysis
- 511 Downloads
To determine the efficacy and maternal complication rates of induction of labor, and to identify a concrete point in time for induction with the lowest possible risk for adverse events.
We designed a retrospective data analysis of all births at the general hospital of Vienna from 2003 to 2008 (n = 16,872) and compared maternal complications of induced labors from 38 or more weeks of gestation versus spontaneous deliveries. The ethical committee of the General Hospital of Vienna and the Medical University of Vienna monitored this study and provided approval.
Women who had induction between 38 and 42 weeks of gestation (n = 1,254) had a significant higher risk for the need of a secondary cesarean (15.2 vs. 8.6%; p < 0.001) and a higher chance for abnormally adherent placentas (1.5 vs. 2.5%; p = 0.13). The amount of maternal blood loss was equal in both groups. Concerning the question when to induct labor, there was no significant difference of distribution of complications between induced labors at term and induction within the next 10 days.
This study suggests that induction is associated with a higher risk for secondary cesareans and abnormally adherent placentas. The exact time of induction seems to be irrelevant between expected date of delivery and the next 10 days.
KeywordsInduction of labor Prolonged pregnancy Secondary cesarean Post-term pregnancy
Conflict of interest
The authors report no conflicts of interests. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.
- 1.Boulvain M, Kelly A, Irion O (2008) Intracervical prostaglandins for induction of labor. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 23(1):CD006971Google Scholar
- 2.Kelly AJ, Tan B (2001) Intravenous oxytocin alone for cervical ripening and induction of labor. Cochrance Database Syst Rev 3:CD003246Google Scholar
- 5.National Collaborating Centre for Women’s and Children’s Health (2008) Induction of labor. Clinical guideline, 2nd edn. RCOG Press, London, pp 42–47Google Scholar
- 12.Caughey AB, Sundaram V, Kaimal AJ, Cheng YW, Gienger A, Little SE et al (2009) Maternal and neonatal outcomes of elective induction of labor. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep) 176:1–257Google Scholar
- 13.Corwley P (2000) Interventions for preventing or improving the outcome of delivery at or beyond term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2:CD000170Google Scholar
- 15.Hannah ME, Hannah WJ, Hellmann J, Hewson S, Milner R, Willan A, The Canadian Multicenter Post-Term Pregnancy Trial Group (1992) Induction of labor as compared with serial antenatal monitoring in post-term pregnancy. A randomized controlled trial. N Engl J Med 326(24):1587–1592PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Bodner-Adler B, Bodner K, Pateisky N, Kimberger O, Chalubinski K, Mayerhofer K, Husslein P (2005) Influence of labor induction on obstetric outcomes in patients with prolonged pregnancy: a comparison between elective induction of labor and spontaneous onset of labor beyond term. Wien Klin Wochenschr 117(7–8):287–292PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar