Literature DB >> 34149214

To Study the Maternal and Neonatal Outcome in Postdated Women Undergoing Induction of Labour Versus Spontaneous Labour.

Setu Dagli1, Michelle Fonseca1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Ensuring safety of the mother along with the delivery of a healthy baby is the ultimate objective of all obstetricians. Labour induction is increasingly becoming one of the most common obstetric interventions in India. The aim of the study is to compare the feto-maternal outcome of induction of labour versus spontaneous labour in postdated women.
METHOD: This was a prospective observational comparative study. A total of 100 patients were selected, 50 who had induction of labour (study group) and 50 who had spontaneous labour (control). A structured proforma and partographs were used to obtain data. RESULT: 42% nulliparous women had induction of labour as compared to 29% multiparous women. The rate of cesarean section (58%) was substantially higher in those who had been induced. Non-progression of labour or failure of induction was the commonest indication for cesarean section. Post-partum haemorrhage was a complication found more commonly in the study group. Perineal tears were found more commonly in the control group.The mean birth weight of babies born to mothers who had been induced was significantly higher than that of those born to women who went into spontaneous labour. The APGAR scores were comparable in both groups. There was a higher incidence of hyperbilirubinemia in the study group.
CONCLUSION: Although induction of labour is a relatively safe procedure, some foetal and maternal risks were found to be higher in induced group than in those with spontaneous labour. Induction must be carried out only when necessary and not as a routine elective procedure. © Federation of Obstetric & Gynecological Societies of India 2021.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cesarean section; Failure of induction; Induction of labour; Postdated; Spontaneous labour

Year:  2021        PMID: 34149214      PMCID: PMC8166986          DOI: 10.1007/s13224-020-01395-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India        ISSN: 0975-6434


  8 in total

1.  Rate of increase in oxytocin dose on the outcome of labor induction.

Authors:  A Durodola; O Kuti; E O Orji; S O Ogunniyi
Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 3.561

Review 2.  Induction of labor versus expectant management for post-date pregnancy: is there sufficient evidence for a change in clinical practice?

Authors:  Ulla-Britt Wennerholm; Henrik Hagberg; Bengt Brorsson; Christina Bergh
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 3.636

3.  WHO recommendations for misoprostol use for obstetric and gynecologic indications.

Authors:  Jennifer Tang; Nathalie Kapp; Monica Dragoman; Joao Paulo de Souza
Journal:  Int J Gynaecol Obstet       Date:  2013-02-19       Impact factor: 3.561

Review 4.  Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term.

Authors:  A M Gülmezoglu; C A Crowther; P Middleton
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2006-10-18

Review 5.  Obstetric "conveniences": elective induction of labor, cesarean birth on demand, and other potentially unnecessary interventions.

Authors:  Kathleen Rice Simpson; Kathleen E Thorman
Journal:  J Perinat Neonatal Nurs       Date:  2005 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 1.638

6.  Is induced labour in the nullipara associated with more maternal and perinatal morbidity?

Authors:  Dan Selo-Ojeme; Cathy Rogers; Ashok Mohanty; Naseem Zaidi; Rose Villar; Panicos Shangaris
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2010-09-14       Impact factor: 2.344

Review 7.  Systematic review: elective induction of labor versus expectant management of pregnancy.

Authors:  Aaron B Caughey; Vandana Sundaram; Anjali J Kaimal; Allison Gienger; Yvonne W Cheng; Kathryn M McDonald; Brian L Shaffer; Douglas K Owens; Dena M Bravata
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2009-08-18       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 8.  Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term.

Authors:  Philippa Middleton; Emily Shepherd; Caroline A Crowther
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-05-09
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.