| Literature DB >> 32410909 |
Chidebe C Anikwe1, Bartholomew C Okorochukwu2, Emmanuel Uchendu3, Cyril C Ikeoha1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Induction of labour is not without risk, and it calls for a method that will be sensitive enough to predict successful labour induction. AIM: This study aims to evaluate the role of transvaginal ultrasonographic cervical length measurement at term in the prediction of successful induction of labour (IOL).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32410909 PMCID: PMC7211251 DOI: 10.1155/2020/8273154
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ScientificWorldJournal ISSN: 1537-744X
Obstetrics and demographic characteristics of the study population (n = 60).
| Characteristics | Frequency (%) |
|---|---|
|
| |
| 0 | 17 (28.3) |
| 1–4 | 35 (58.3) |
| >4 | 8 (13.3) |
|
| |
|
| |
| Primary | 20 (33.3) |
| Secondary | 19 (31.7) |
| Tertiary | 21 (35.0) |
|
| |
|
| |
| Urban | 37 (61.7) |
| Rural | 23 (38.3) |
|
| |
|
| |
| Government employed | 18 (30.0) |
| Trading | 15 (25.0) |
| None | 15 (25.0) |
| Private employed | 6 (6.0) |
| Self-employed | 6 (6.0) |
|
| |
| Mean (range) | |
| Maternal age (years) | 30.6 ± 6.4 (19–43) |
| Gestational age (weeks) | 39.5 ± 1.5 (36–42) |
Figure 1Indication for induction of labour. Key : BOH, bad obstetric history; GDM, gestational diabetes mellitus; ELDERLY, elderly primigravida; HTN DX, hypertensive disease in pregnancy; IUGR, intrauterine growth restriction; JAUNDICE, jaundice in pregnancy; MALFORMED, congenital malformation; PD, postdated pregnancy; RENAL DX, renal disease; SOCIAL, social induction of labour; UNSTABLE, unstable lie.
Clinical/ultrasound findings.
| Parameters |
| Mean (SD) | Mode | Median |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bishop score | 7.5 (1.02) | 7.0 | 7.0 | |
| 6-7 | 31 (51.7) | |||
| >7 | 29 (48.3) | |||
| Preinduction cervical length | 2.9 (0.69) | 2.03 | 3.01 | |
| <3 cm | 29 (48.3) | |||
| ≥3 cm | 31 (51.7) |
Figure 2Association between induction delivery interval and sonographically measured cervical length.
Figure 3Association between induction delivery interval and clinically measured Bishop score.
Influence of the Bishop score on induction delivery interval.
| Variable | Bishop score |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| ≤7 | >7 | ||
| Duration of labour | |||
| <6 hours | 18 | 14 | 0.465 |
| ≥6 hours | 13 | 15 | |
X = 0.577, df (1); P value = 0.448; R = 0.012 P value = 0.465. RR for cohort BS ≤ 7: 1.21(95% CI 0.734–2.001). RR for cohort BS > 7: 0.82(95% CI 0.484–1.377).
Influence of the cervical length on induction delivery interval.
| Variable | Cervical length |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| ≤3 cm | >3 cm | ||
| Duration of labour | |||
| <6 cm | 24 | 8 | 0.001 |
| ≥6 cm | 5 | 23 | |
X 2 = 19.526; df (1) P = 0.00001; R = 0.681 P value = 0.001. RR for cohort CL ≤ 3: 4.20 (95% CI 1.85–9.529). RR for cohort CL > 3: 0.30(95% CI0.163–0.568).
Regression analysis of preinduction cervical length vs. duration of labour with confounding variables.
| Statistics | Nil | Parity | Age | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1–4 | >4 | <20 | 20–29 | 30–39 | ≥40 | ||
|
| ||||||||
| Regression | 0.681 | 0.701 | 0.639 | 0.794 | 1.000 | 0.552 | 0.745 | 0.849 |
|
| 46.4 | 67.5 | 74.4 | 65.5 | 67.4 | 77.7 | 55.4 | 72.1 |
| Std error estimate | 2.13 | 2.22 | 2.312 | 1.239 | — | 2.303 | 2.049 | 1.583 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
|
| 50.128 | 14.505 | 22.732 | 10.209 | — | 10.07 | 27.377 | 18.092 |
|
| 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.019 | — | 0.004 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
|
| 7.08 | 3.809 | 4.768 | 3.195 | — | 3.174 | 5.232 | 4.253 |
|
| 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.019 | — | 0.004 | 0.001 | 0.004 |