Literature DB >> 15802392

Bishop score and risk of cesarean delivery after induction of labor in nulliparous women.

Francis P J M Vrouenraets1, Frans J M E Roumen, Cary J G Dehing, Eline S A van den Akker, Maureen J B Aarts, Esther J T Scheve.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the risk and risk factors for cesarean delivery associated with medical and elective induction of labor in nulliparous women.
METHODS: A prospective cohort study was performed in nulliparous women at term with vertex singleton gestations who had labor induced at 2 obstetrical centers. Medical and elective indications and Bishop scores were recorded before labor induction. Obstetric and neonatal data were analyzed and compared with the results in women with a spontaneous onset of labor. Data were analyzed using univariate and multivariable regression modeling.
RESULTS: A total of 1,389 women were included in the study. The cesarean delivery rate was 12.0% in women with a spontaneous onset of labor (n = 765), 23.4% in women undergoing labor induction for medical reasons (n = 435) (unadjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.24; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.64-3.06), and 23.8% in women whose labor was electively induced (n = 189) (unadjusted OR 2.29; 95% CI 1.53-3.41). However, after adjusting for the Bishop score at admission, no significant differences in cesarean delivery rates were found among the 3 groups. A Bishop score of 5 or less was a predominant risk factor for a cesarean delivery in all 3 groups (adjusted OR 2.32; 95% CI 1.66-3.25). Other variables with significantly increased risk for cesarean delivery included maternal age of 30 years or older, body mass index of 31 or higher, use of epidural analgesia during the first stage of labor, and birth weight of 3,500 g or higher. In both induction groups, more newborns required neonatal care, more mothers needed a blood transfusion, and the maternal hospital stay was longer.
CONCLUSION: Compared with spontaneous onset of labor, medical and elective induction of labor in nulliparous women at term with a single fetus in cephalic presentation is associated with an increased risk of cesarean delivery, predominantly related to an unfavorable Bishop score at admission. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II-2.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15802392     DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000152338.76759.38

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  52 in total

1.  Decision Making About Method of Delivery on the U.S.-Mexico Border.

Authors:  Carla L DeSisto; Jill A McDonald; Roger Rochat; Beatriz A Diaz-Apodaca; Eugene Declercq
Journal:  Health Care Women Int       Date:  2014-12-20

2.  How effective is amniotomy as a means of induction of labour?

Authors:  S M Cooley; M P Geary; M P O'Connell; K McQuillan; P McParland; D Keane
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2010-05-28       Impact factor: 1.568

3.  Care practice #1: labor begins on its own.

Authors:  Debby Amis
Journal:  J Perinat Educ       Date:  2007

4.  Elective induction versus spontaneous labour in Latin America.

Authors:  Gláucia Virgínia Guerra; José Guilherme Cecatti; João Paulo Souza; Aníbal Faúndes; Sirlei Siani Morais; Ahmet Metin Gülmezoglu; Renato Passini; Mary Angela Parpinelli; Guillermo Carroli
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2011-07-05       Impact factor: 9.408

5.  Nonmedically indicated induction vs expectant treatment in term nulliparous women.

Authors:  Jennifer L Bailit; William Grobman; Yuan Zhao; Ronald J Wapner; Uma M Reddy; Michael W Varner; Kenneth J Leveno; Steve N Caritis; Jay D Iams; Alan T Tita; George Saade; Yoram Sorokin; Dwight J Rouse; Sean C Blackwell; Jorge E Tolosa; J Peter VanDorsten
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-06-28       Impact factor: 8.661

6.  Is elective induction safe? A prospective analysis.

Authors:  Vidya Ramasamy; Suchitra Thunga; S R Nayak
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2012-02-14

7.  Effectiveness of Dinoprostone and Cook's Balloon for Labor Induction in Primipara Women at Term.

Authors:  Hui Du; Na Zhang; Chan-Yun Xiao; Guo-Qiang Sun; Yun Zhao
Journal:  Curr Med Sci       Date:  2020-10-29

Review 8.  Factors that influence the practice of elective induction of labor: what does the evidence tell us?

Authors:  Jennifer Moore; Lisa Kane Low
Journal:  J Perinat Neonatal Nurs       Date:  2012 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 1.638

9.  Induction of labor compared to expectant management in low-risk women and associated perinatal outcomes.

Authors:  Yvonne W Cheng; Anjali J Kaimal; Jonathan M Snowden; James M Nicholson; Aaron B Caughey
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-09-22       Impact factor: 8.661

10.  Transvaginal ultrasonographic cervical measurement in predicting failed labor induction and cesarean delivery for failure to progress in nulliparous women.

Authors:  Kyo Hoon Park
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 2.153

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.