Literature DB >> 23063017

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

Yvonne W Cheng1, Anjali J Kaimal, Jonathan M Snowden, James M Nicholson, Aaron B Caughey.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine the association of labor induction and perinatal outcomes. STUDY
DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of low-risk nulliparous women with term, live births. Women who had induction at a given gestational age (eg, 39 weeks) were compared to delivery at a later gestation (eg, 40, 41, or 42 weeks).
RESULTS: Compared to delivery at a later gestational age, those induced at 39 weeks had a lower risk of cesarean (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88-0.91) and labor dystocia (aOR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.84-0.94). Their neonates had lowered risk of having 5-minute Apgar <7 (aOR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.72-0.92), meconium aspiration syndrome (aOR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.19-0.48), and admission to neonatal intensive care unit (aOR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.78-0.97). Similar findings were seen for women who were induced at 40 weeks compared to delivery later.
CONCLUSION: Induction of labor in low-risk women at term is not associated with increased risk of cesarean delivery compared to delivery later.
Copyright © 2012 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23063017      PMCID: PMC3719847          DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2012.09.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  24 in total

1.  Births: final data for 2008.

Authors:  Joyce A Martin; Brady E Hamilton; Paul D Sutton; Stephanie J Ventura; T J Mathews; Michelle J K Osterman
Journal:  Natl Vital Stat Rep       Date:  2010-12-08

2.  Postterm with favorable cervix: is induction necessary?

Authors:  Boonsri Chanrachakul; Yongyoth Herabutya
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol       Date:  2003-02-10       Impact factor: 2.435

3.  ACOG Practice Bulletin. Clinical management guidelines for obstetricians-gynecologists. Number 55, September 2004 (replaces practice pattern number 6, October 1997). Management of Postterm Pregnancy.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 7.661

4.  Neonatal complications of term pregnancy: rates by gestational age increase in a continuous, not threshold, fashion.

Authors:  Aaron B Caughey; A Eugene Washington; Russell K Laros
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 8.661

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

Authors:  Francis P J M Vrouenraets; Frans J M E Roumen; Cary J G Dehing; Eline S A van den Akker; Maureen J B Aarts; Esther J T Scheve
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 7.661

6.  Induction of labor as compared with serial antenatal monitoring in post-term pregnancy. A randomized controlled trial. The Canadian Multicenter Post-term Pregnancy Trial Group.

Authors:  M E Hannah; W J Hannah; J Hellmann; S Hewson; R Milner; A Willan
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1992-06-11       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Postterm pregnancy: putting the merits of a policy of induction of labor into perspective.

Authors:  M E Hannah; C Huh; S A Hewson; W J Hannah
Journal:  Birth       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 3.689

8.  Induction of labor and the relationship to cesarean delivery: A review of 7001 consecutive inductions.

Authors:  J D Yeast; A Jones; M Poskin
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 8.661

9.  A clinical trial of induction of labor versus expectant management in postterm pregnancy. The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Network of Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units.

Authors: 
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 8.661

10.  Risk of cesarean delivery after induction at term in nulliparous women with an unfavorable cervix.

Authors:  David P Johnson; Nancy R Davis; Allen J Brown
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 8.661

View more
  14 in total

1.  Using multiple imputation to address the inconsistent distribution of a controlling variable when modeling an infrequent outcome.

Authors:  Yujia Zhang; Sara Crawford; Sheree L Boulet; Michael Monsour; Bruce Cohen; Patricia McKane; Karen Freeman
Journal:  J Mod Appl Stat Methods       Date:  2017

2.  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

3.  Nonmedically indicated induction in morbidly obese women is not associated with an increased risk of cesarean delivery.

Authors:  Tetsuya Kawakita; Sara N Iqbal; Chun-Chih Huang; Uma M Reddy
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-05-31       Impact factor: 8.661

4.  The ARRIVE Trial: Interpretation from an Epidemiologic Perspective.

Authors:  Suzan L Carmichael; Jonathan M Snowden
Journal:  J Midwifery Womens Health       Date:  2019-07-02       Impact factor: 2.388

5.  Labor Induction versus Expectant Management in Low-Risk Nulliparous Women.

Authors:  William A Grobman; Madeline M Rice; Uma M Reddy; Alan T N Tita; Robert M Silver; Gail Mallett; Kim Hill; Elizabeth A Thom; Yasser Y El-Sayed; Annette Perez-Delboy; Dwight J Rouse; George R Saade; Kim A Boggess; Suneet P Chauhan; Jay D Iams; Edward K Chien; Brian M Casey; Ronald S Gibbs; Sindhu K Srinivas; Geeta K Swamy; Hyagriv N Simhan; George A Macones
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2018-08-09       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Term elective induction of labour and perinatal outcomes in obese women: retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  V R Lee; B G Darney; J M Snowden; E K Main; W Gilbert; J Chung; A B Caughey
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 6.531

7.  Clinical Impact of a Restrictive Labor Induction Approval Process.

Authors:  Mary Catherine Tolcher; Alexis N Hokenstad; Amy L Weaver; Michaela E McGree; Carl H Rose; Abimbola O Famuyide; Brian C Brost
Journal:  Gynecol Obstet Invest       Date:  2018-10-12       Impact factor: 2.729

Review 8.  A novel misoprostol delivery system for induction of labor: clinical utility and patient considerations.

Authors:  Megan L Stephenson; Deborah A Wing
Journal:  Drug Des Devel Ther       Date:  2015-04-22       Impact factor: 4.162

9.  Elective Labor Induction at 39 Weeks of Gestation Compared With Expectant Management: Factors Associated With Adverse Outcomes in Low-Risk Nulliparous Women.

Authors:  Yasser Y El-Sayed; Madeline Murguia Rice; William A Grobman; Uma M Reddy; Alan T N Tita; Robert M Silver; Gail Mallett; Kim Hill; Elizabeth A Thom; Ronald J Wapner; Dwight J Rouse; George R Saade; John M Thorp; Suneet P Chauhan; Edward K Chien; Brian M Casey; Ronald S Gibbs; Sindhu K Srinivas; Geeta K Swamy; Hyagriv N Simhan; George A Macones
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 7.623

10.  Effects of induction of labor prior to post-term in low-risk pregnancies: a systematic review.

Authors:  Eva Rydahl; Lena Eriksen; Mette Juhl
Journal:  JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep       Date:  2019-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.