Membrane sweeping to induce labor in low-risk patients at term pregnancy: a randomised controlled trial

Effectiveness of Single Fetal Membrane Sweeping in Reducing Elective Labor Induction for Postdate Pregnancies (38+0 to 40+6 Weeks): A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

 Postdate pregnancy is characterized by a heightened risk for both maternal and perinatal complications. Owing to the risks, clinicians frequently turn to elective labor induction as a management strategy for postdate pregnancies. However, patients are increasingly informed and apprehensive about this approach and its associated risks. This has prompted a search for alternative management methods that may encourage spontaneous labor in pregnant women. One such approach is the use of fetal membrane sweeping, a method known to increase the likelihood of spontaneous labor onset. Yet, it remains unclear whether a single fetal membrane sweeping procedure can effectively reduce the need for elective labor induction in postdate pregnancies while minimizing risks to both the mother and fetus.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this study was to assess the efficacy of a single fetal membrane sweeping procedure conducted between 38+0 and 40+6 weeks of gestation in reducing the rate of elective labor induction among postdate pregnancies at Central Hospital Benin City, Nigeria. Secondary objectives included evaluating the impact of membrane sweeping on maternal and perinatal outcomes.

METHODOLOGY

This open-label superiority randomized controlled study was carried out from June 2020 to March 2021, following ethical approval from the Hospital Management Board (HMB). One hundred and forty eligible participants, without contraindications to vaginal delivery, were randomly assigned to one of two groups. The first group received a single fetal membrane sweeping procedure between 38+0 and 40+6 weeks of gestation, while the control group underwent vaginal examination only to assess the Bishop score. Participants were monitored until delivery. Data analysis was performed. Results were considered statistically significant at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

The implementation of a single fetal membrane sweeping procedure effectively reduced the incidence of elective labor induction. Specifically, the membrane sweep group exhibited a significantly lower rate of elective labor induction compared to the control group (9.0% vs. 27.1%; p=0.0083). Moreover, a substantial proportion of the treatment group (91.4%) experienced spontaneous labor, while the control group reported a rate of 72.9%. The difference was statistically significant (p=0.0054). Notably, the control group exhibited a significantly longer mean time interval from recruitment to delivery (10.67±3.51 days) than the membrane sweeping group (3.64±4.123 days; p<0.05). Also, postdate women in the membrane sweep group were less likely to require cervical ripening with Foley's catheter than those in the control group (33.3% vs. 100%; RR: 0.33 (0.11-1.03); p=0.0057). Still, maternal satisfaction was significantly higher in the membrane-sweeping group (p<0.01). No significant differences were noted across the groups in maternal and neonatal outcomes.

CONCLUSION

In low-risk term pregnancies, a single fetal membrane sweeping procedure is a superior alternative to no membrane sweeping in reducing the rate of elective labor induction for postdate pregnancies and in shortening the duration of term pregnancy.

Perinatal and maternal outcomes according to timing of induction of labour: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The risk of adverse perinatal and maternal outcomes increases with gestational age, and although induction of labour may reduce these risks, the optimal timing of induction remains unknown. We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis, to determine the gestational age at which induction should be offered. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, and Embase databases from inception to July 2022, to identify randomised trials comparing induction of labour at or beyond 37' weeks gestation with expectant management or delayed induction, and according to the gestational age at planned induction. We undertook random effects meta-analysis and pooled estimates as odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals. We assessed risk of bias of studies using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool 2.0. We included 44 trials (23,960 women and 22,191 offspring) from 1,839 citations in our meta-analysis. The odds of perinatal death (odds ratio 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.22 to 0.81; 26 studies, 20,154 offspring), stillbirth (0.40, 0.16 to 0.98; 25 studies, 19,412 offspring), admission to neonatal intensive care unit (0.86, 0.78 to 0.96; 23 studies, 18,846 offspring), and caesarean section (0.90, 0.83 to 0.98; 40 studies, 23,616 women) were reduced in the induction of labour group compared to expectant management or delayed induction. The odds of admission to neonatal intensive care unit (0.82, 0.70 to 0.96; 6 studies, 9,316 offspring) were lower with induction of labour at 41 weeks compared to induction at or after 42 weeks' gestation, and the odds of caesarean section were reduced with labour induction at 39 weeks' compared to induction at or after 40 weeks' (0.83, 0.74 to 0.93; 8 studies, 7,677 women). There were no significant differences in pregnancy outcomes by method of induction of labour. Induction of labour compared to expectant management or delayed induction reduces the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes, and the optimal timing may depend on the specific outcome of interest.

Membrane Sweeping to Induce Labor in Post-term Pregnant Women: Success Rate and Outcomes

Introduction Membrane sweeping is a mechanical technique by which a clinician inserts one or two fingers into the cervix and detaches the inferior pole of the membranes from the lower uterine segment using a continuous circular sweeping motion. This produces hormones that promote effacement and dilatation, potentially promoting labor. This study aimed to determine the success rate and the outcome of membrane sweeping in postdate pregnant women in Alhasahesa Teaching Hospital.  Methods This prospective descriptive cross-sectional study conducted at Alhashesa Teaching Hospital, Alhashesa, Sudan, between May and October 2022 included all pregnant women at 40 or more weeks of gestation who underwent membrane sweeping to induce labor. We recorded the number of sweeps needed, sweeping-to-delivery interval, mode of delivery, maternal outcome, and fetal outcome (including birth weight, Apgar score at delivery, and the need for neonatal intensive care unit admission [NICU]). Data were collected through patient interviews using a specially designed questionnaire and analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS®) software for Windows, Version 26.0 (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.), Results Membrane sweeping induced labor in 127 postdate women (86.4%). Most of the women in the study (n=138; 93.9%) had no complications, seven (4.8%) had postpartum hemorrhage, one (0.7%) had sepsis, and one (0.7%) was admitted to the intensive care unit. All neonates were alive, and most (n=126; 85.8%) birth weights ranged from 2.5 kg to 3.5 kg. Thirteen (8.8%) neonates weighed less than 2.5 kg, and eight (5.4%) weighed more than 3.5 kg. One hundred thirty-three (90.5%) had Apgar scores <7, eight (5.4%) had Apgar scores under five, and six (4.1%) had Apgar scores of five to six. Seven neonates (4.8%) were admitted to the NICU. Conclusions Membrane sweeping to induce labor has a high success rate, and it can be safe for both the mother and the baby, as it is associated with a low rate of maternal and fetal complications. Additionally, no maternal and/or fetal deaths were reported. A large, controlled study is required to compare its benefits over other methods of induction of labor.

Effectiveness and safety of membrane sweeping in the prevention of post-term pregnancy: a randomised controlled trial

There is a rising concern with increasing rates of pharmacologically induced labour and its complications. Membrane sweeping is a simple and less invasive means of initiating spontaneous labour onset. We compared the safety and efficacy of membrane sweeping. A total of 186 women (62 in each arm) were recruited at the antenatal clinic at 39 weeks. The intervention groups had membrane sweeping once and twice weekly respectively while the control arm had no membrane sweeping. They were all monitored and followed up till delivery. The trial was registered with the South Africa registry www.pactr.org (PACTR202112841108933) The incidence of prolonged pregnancy was 32.3%, 19.4% and 11.7% among the control, once-weekly, and twice-weekly groups respectively. The sweeping to the delivery interval was significantly shorter for the twice-weekly group (7.4 days) compared to once weekly (8.8 days) and the control group (10.6 days). There were significantly higher odds of spontaneous labour onset in the twice-weekly group (HR 1.53, p = .029) compared to the control group (HR 0.65, p = .033) and the once-weekly group using once weekly as reference. Membrane sweeping is a safe and effective means of preventing prolonged pregnancy. Twice-weekly sweeping of foetal membranes is more effective than once-weekly or no sweeping without added adverse feto-maternal outcomes.IMPACT STATEMENTWhat is already known about the subject? There is no evidence supporting any increase in maternal or foetal morbidity suggesting that membrane sweeping is a safe procedure to offer to all low-risk pregnant women so as to initiate spontaneous labour onset.What do the results of the study add? Membrane sweeping twice weekly after 39weeks for low-risk pregnant women is more effective than once weekly or no sweep with no added adverse maternal or perinatal risks.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and or further research? Twice-weekly membrane sweeping is encouraged in selected patients to reduce the risks associated with post-term pregnancy.

Clinical predictive factors for vaginal delivery following induction of labour among pregnant women in Jordan

Background

Induction of labour (IOL) is an important and common clinical procedure in obstetrics. In the current study, we evaluate predictors of vaginal delivery in both nulliparous and multiparous women in north Jordan who were induced with vaginal prostaglandins.

Method

A prospective study was conducted on 530 pregnant women at King Abdullah University Hospital (KAUH) in north Jordan. All pregnant mothers with singleton live fetuses, who had induction of labour (IOL) between July 2017 and June 2019, were included in the study. Mode of delivery, whether vaginal or caesarean, was the primary outcome. Several maternal and fetal variables were investigated. The safety and benefit of repeated dosage of vaginal prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) tablets, neonatal outcomes and factors that affect duration of labour were also evaluated.

Pearson χ2 test was used to investigate the significance of association between categorical variables, while student’s t-test and ANOVA were applied to examine the mean differences between categorical and numerical variables. Linear regression analysis was utilized to study the relation between two continuous variables. A multivariate regression analysis was then performed. Significance level was considered at alpha less than 0.05.

Results

Nulliparous women (N = 254) had significantly higher cesarean delivery rate (58.7% vs. 17.8%, p < 0.001) and longer duration of labour (16.1 ± 0.74 h vs. 11.0 ± 0.43 h, p < 0.001) than multiparous women (N = 276). In nulliparous women, the rate of vaginal delivery was significantly higher in women with higher Bishop score; the mean Bishop score was 3.47 ± 0.12 in nulliparous women who had vaginal delivery vs. 3.06 ± 0.10 in women who had cesarean delivery (Adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 1.2, 95% CI: 1.03–1.28, p = 0.03). In multiparous women, the rate of vaginal delivery was significantly higher in women with higher Bishop scores and lower in women with higher body mass index (BMI). The mean Bishop score was 3.97 ± 0.07 in multiparous women who had vaginal delivery vs. 3.56 ± 0.16 in women who had cesarean delivery (AOR = 1.5, 95% CI: 1.1–2.1, p = 0.01). The mean BMI was 30.24 ± 0.28 kg/m² in multiparous women who had vaginal delivery vs. 32.36 ± 0.73 kg/m² in women who had cesarean delivery (AOR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.84–0.96, p = 0.005). 27% of nulliparous women who received more than two PGE2 tablets and 50% of multiparous women who received more than two PGE2 tablets had vaginal delivery with no significant increase in neonatal morbidity.

Conclusion

Parity and cervical status are the main predictors of successful labour induction. Further studies are required to investigate the benefit of the use of additional doses of vaginal PGE2 above the recommended dose for IOL.

Induction of labour in low-resource settings

Due to the disparity in resource availability between low- and high-resource settings, practice recommendations relevant to high-income countries are not always relevant and often need to be adapted to low-resource settings. The adaptation applies to induction of labour (IOL) which is an obstetric procedure that deserves special attention because it involves the initiation of a process that requires regular and frequent monitoring of the mother and foetus by experienced healthcare professionals. Lack of problem recognition and/or substandard care during IOL may result in harm with long-term sequelae. In this article, the authors discuss unique challenges such as insufficient resources (including staff, midwives, doctors, equipment, and medications) that result in occasional inadequate patient monitoring and/or delayed interventions during IOL in low-resource settings. We also discuss modifications in indications and methods for IOL, issues related to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infections, the feasibility of outpatient induction, clinical protocols and a minimum dataset for quality improvement projects. Overall, the desire to achieve a vaginal birth with IOL should not cloud the necessity to observe the required safety measures and implement necessary interventions; given that childbirth practices are the major determinants of pregnancy outcomes and patient satisfaction.

Ultrasound assessment of the cervix in predicting successful membrane sweeping: a prospective observational study

OBJECTIVE

Membrane sweeping has been shown to potentially reduce the need for formal induction of labor. The primary aim of this study was to elucidate the role of ultrasound assessment of the cervix in predicting successful membrane sweeping in singleton pregnancies at term; the secondary aim was to build a multiparametric prediction model integrating, maternal, pregnancy and ultrasound characteristics, able to anticipate spontaneous delivery at term.

METHODS

Prospective observational study including singleton pregnancies at term undergoing membrane sweeping. Cervical length (CL) and posterior cervical angle (PCA) were assessed on ultrasound immediately before the procedure. Primary outcome was successful membrane sweeping, defined as spontaneous vaginal birth without formal induction within the 24hours. A subgroup analysis was computed considering women experiencing spontaneous vaginal birth within 48 hours from the procedure. The secondary outcome was to explore the diagnostic performance of a multiparametric model including maternal, pregnancy, and ultrasound assessment of the cervix in predicting spontaneous vaginal birth following membrane sweeping. Multivariate logistic regression and area under the curve (ROC) analyses were used to compute the data.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-nine singleton pregnancies undergoing membrane sweeping were included in the analysis. Successful membrane sweeping within 24 hours occurred in 68/159 women (36.5%). Parity (aOR = 1.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-2.44), gestational age (aOR = 1.32, 95% CI 1.14-1.76), CL (aOR = 0.47, 95%CI 0.31-0.69) and PCA (aOR = 1.22, 95%CI 1.07-1.41) were independently associated with spontaneous vaginal birth within 24 hours from sweeping. The AUC of the constructed model was 0.796 (95% CI 0.727-0.865). Likewise, CL (aOR = 0.80, 95%CI 0.72-0.89), PCA (aOR = 1.19, 95%CI 1.10-1.28) and gestational age at the procedure (aOR = 1.65, 95%CI 1.09-1.86; p = .04) were independently associated with delivery within 48 hours with an AUC of 0.737 (95%CI 0.659-0.815).

CONCLUSIONS

Cervical ultrasound assessment of the cervix prior to membrane sweeping is associated with spontaneous vaginal birth within 24 and 48 hours from the procedure. The combination of cervical ultrasonographic parameters with parity and gestational age can predict the chances of delivery within 24 or 48 hours from membrane sweeping. The findings from this study support the use of ultrasound assessment of the cervix prior to membrane sweeping in order to more accurately predict the likelihood of spontaneous vaginal delivery.

Membrane sweeping for induction of labour

BACKGROUND

Induction of labour involves stimulating uterine contractions artificially to promote the onset of labour. There are several pharmacological, surgical and mechanical methods used to induce labour. Membrane sweeping is a mechanical technique whereby a clinician inserts one or two fingers into the cervix and using a continuous circular sweeping motion detaches the inferior pole of the membranes from the lower uterine segment. This produces hormones that encourage effacement and dilatation potentially promoting labour. This review is an update to a review first published in 2005.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects and safety of membrane sweeping for induction of labour in women at or near term (≥ 36 weeks' gestation).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (25 February 2019), ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (25 February 2019), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing membrane sweeping used for third trimester cervical ripening or labour induction with placebo/no treatment or other methods listed on a predefined list of labour induction methods. Cluster-randomised trials were eligible, but none were identified.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, risk of bias and extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy. Disagreements were resolved by discussion, or by including a third review author. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 44 studies (20 new to this update), reporting data for 6940 women and their infants. We used random-effects throughout. Overall, the risk of bias was assessed as low or unclear risk in most domains across studies. Evidence certainty, assessed using GRADE, was found to be generally low, mainly due to study design, inconsistency and imprecision. Six studies (n = 1284) compared membrane sweeping with more than one intervention and were thus included in more than one comparison. No trials reported on the outcomes uterine hyperstimulation with/without fetal heart rate (FHR) change, uterine rupture or neonatal encephalopathy. Forty studies (6548 participants) compared membrane sweeping with no treatment/sham Women randomised to membrane sweeping may be more likely to experience: · spontaneous onset of labour (average risk ratio (aRR) 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 1.34, 17 studies, 3170 participants, low-certainty evidence). but less likely to experience: · induction (aRR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.94, 16 studies, 3224 participants, low-certainty evidence); There may be little to no difference between groups for: · caesareans (aRR 0.94, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.04, 32 studies, 5499 participants, moderate-certainty evidence); · spontaneous vaginal birth (aRR 1.03, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.07, 26 studies, 4538 participants, moderate-certainty evidence); · maternal death or serious morbidity (aRR 0.83, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.20, 17 studies, 2749 participants, low-certainty evidence); · neonatal perinatal death or serious morbidity (aRR 0.83, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.17, 18 studies, 3696 participants, low-certainty evidence). Four studies reported data for 480 women comparing membrane sweeping with vaginal/intracervical prostaglandins There may be little to no difference between groups for the outcomes: · spontaneous onset of labour (aRR, 1.24, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.57, 3 studies, 339 participants, low-certainty evidence); · induction (aRR 0.90, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.45, 2 studies, 157 participants, low-certainty evidence); · caesarean (aRR 0.69, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.09, 3 studies, 339 participants, low-certainty evidence); · spontaneous vaginal birth (aRR 1.12, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.32, 2 studies, 252 participants, low-certainty evidence); · maternal death or serious morbidity (aRR 0.93, 95% CI 0.27 to 3.21, 1 study, 87 participants, low-certainty evidence); · neonatal perinatal death or serious morbidity (aRR 0.40, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.33, 2 studies, 269 participants, low-certainty evidence). One study, reported data for 104 women, comparing membrane sweeping with intravenous oxytocin +/- amniotomy There may be little to no difference between groups for: · spontaneous onset of labour (aRR 1.32, 95% CI 88 to 1.96, 1 study, 69 participants, low-certainty evidence); · induction (aRR 0.51, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.42, 1 study, 69 participants, low-certainty evidence); · caesarean (aRR 0.69, 95% CI 0.12 to 3.85, 1 study, 69 participants, low-certainty evidence); · maternal death or serious morbidity was reported on, but there were no events. Two studies providing data for 160 women compared membrane sweeping with vaginal/oral misoprostol There may be little to no difference between groups for: · caesareans (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.31 to 2.17, 1 study, 96 participants, low-certainty evidence). One study providing data for 355 women which compared once weekly membrane sweep with twice-weekly membrane sweep and a sham procedure There may be little to no difference between groups for: · induction (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.85, 1 study, 234 participants, low-certainty); · caesareans (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.46, 1 study, 234 participants, low-certainty evidence); · spontaneous vaginal birth (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.17, 1 study, 234 participants, moderate-certainty evidence); · maternal death or serious maternal morbidity (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.02, 1 study, 234 participants, low-certainty evidence); · neonatal death or serious neonatal perinatal morbidity (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.18 to 21.76, 1 study, 234 participants, low-certainty evidence); We found no studies that compared membrane sweeping with amniotomy only or mechanical methods. Three studies, providing data for 675 women, reported that women indicated favourably on their experience of membrane sweeping with one study reporting that 88% (n = 312) of women questioned in the postnatal period would choose membrane sweeping in the next pregnancy. Two studies reporting data for 290 women reported that membrane sweeping is more cost-effective than using prostaglandins, although more research should be undertaken in this area.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Membrane sweeping may be effective in achieving a spontaneous onset of labour, but the evidence for this was of low certainty. When compared to expectant management, it potentially reduces the incidence of formal induction of labour. Questions remain as to whether there is an optimal number of membrane sweeps and timings and gestation of these to facilitate induction of labour.

Women's information needs, decision-making and experiences of membrane sweeping to promote spontaneous labour

OBJECTIVE

To explore and synthesise evidence of women's information needs, decision-making and experiences of membrane sweeping to promote spontaneous labour.

DESIGN

A systematic review following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) meta-aggregative approach to qualitative evidence synthesis. Relevant databases were searched for literature published in English between 2000-19. Study quality was assessed using the JBI quality assessment tool for qualitative studies.

SETTING

Qualitative research conducted in OECD countries describing women's information needs, decision-making and/or experiences of membrane sweeping to promote spontaneous labour.

FINDINGS

One article met the criteria for inclusion. This article describes the experience of a membrane sweep given without consent.

KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

There is a lack of evidence around women's information needs, decision-making and experiences of membrane sweeping. This is concerning, especially in the context of rising rates of formal induction of labour. Further research is needed to investigate how women are being offered membrane sweeping and what information women need to make informed choices about membrane sweeping to promote spontaneous labour.

Does induction of labour in nulliparous hypertensive women result in vaginal birth? - A descriptive study utilising birth registry data

BACKGROUND

Induction of labour (IOL) is a common procedure yet we have little information on the efficacy of the process for women with a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy (HDP).

OBJECTIVE

To describe the birth type and associated factors in nulliparous HDP women undergoing an induction of labour.

STUDY DESIGN

Statutorily collected datasets on every birth and hospital admission which occurred in the state of NSW Australia between the years 2000-2011 were analysed. Hypertensive women were compared to normotensive women.

RESULTS

Of the nulliparous women, 9.9% had a HDP. IOL for HDP women were 56.2% in a cohort of 447 558 women. The AOR for a woman with a HDP undergoing an IOL resulting in a vaginal delivery when compared to a normotensive woman is 0.86 (95% CI 0.83-0.88). Prior to 33 weeks, the lowest perinatal mortality rates (PMR) are seen in women who undergo elective caesarean section (C/S). For women with preeclampsia (PE), lower PMR are seen in women who undergo IOL.

CONCLUSION

For women with PE and SPE, IOL resulted in lower rates of vaginal delivery than spontaneous labour when compared to normotensive women who also underwent IOL. Women with PE at ≥33 weeks who underwent IOL had the lowest PMR.

Which method is best for the induction of labour? A systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

More than 150,000 pregnant women in England and Wales have their labour induced each year. Multiple pharmacological, mechanical and complementary methods are available to induce labour.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the relative effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of labour induction methods and, data permitting, effects in different clinical subgroups.

METHODS

We carried out a systematic review using Cochrane methods. The Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register was searched (March 2014). This contains over 22,000 reports of controlled trials (published from 1923 onwards) retrieved from weekly searches of OVID MEDLINE (1966 to current); Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library); EMBASE (1982 to current); Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (1984 to current); ClinicalTrials.gov; the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Portal; and hand-searching of relevant conference proceedings and journals. We included randomised controlled trials examining interventions to induce labour compared with placebo, no treatment or other interventions in women eligible for third-trimester induction. We included outcomes relating to efficacy, safety and acceptability to women. In addition, for the economic analysis we searched the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, and Economic Evaluations Databases, NHS Economic Evaluation Database and the Health Technology Assessment database. We carried out a network meta-analysis (NMA) using all of the available evidence, both direct and indirect, to produce estimates of the relative effects of each treatment compared with others in a network. We developed a de novo decision tree model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of various methods. The costs included were the intervention and other hospital costs incurred (price year 2012-13). We reviewed the literature to identify preference-based utilities for the health-related outcomes in the model. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, expected costs, utilities and net benefit. We represent uncertainty in the optimal intervention using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

RESULTS

We identified 1190 studies; 611 were eligible for inclusion. The interventions most likely to achieve vaginal delivery (VD) within 24 hours were intravenous oxytocin with amniotomy [posterior rank 2; 95% credible intervals (CrIs) 1 to 9] and higher-dose (≥ 50 µg) vaginal misoprostol (rank 3; 95% CrI 1 to 6). Compared with placebo, several treatments reduced the odds of caesarean section, but we observed considerable uncertainty in treatment rankings. For uterine hyperstimulation, double-balloon catheter had the highest probability of being among the best three treatments, whereas vaginal misoprostol (≥ 50 µg) was most likely to increase the odds of excessive uterine activity. For other safety outcomes there were insufficient data or there was too much uncertainty to identify which treatments performed 'best'. Few studies collected information on women's views. Owing to incomplete reporting of the VD within 24 hours outcome, the cost-effectiveness analysis could compare only 20 interventions. The analysis suggested that most interventions have similar utility and differ mainly in cost. With a caveat of considerable uncertainty, titrated (low-dose) misoprostol solution and buccal/sublingual misoprostol had the highest likelihood of being cost-effective.

LIMITATIONS

There was considerable uncertainty in findings and there were insufficient data for some planned subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, misoprostol and oxytocin with amniotomy (for women with favourable cervix) is more successful than other agents in achieving VD within 24 hours. The ranking according to safety of different methods was less clear. The cost-effectiveness analysis suggested that titrated (low-dose) oral misoprostol solution resulted in the highest utility, whereas buccal/sublingual misoprostol had the lowest cost. There was a high degree of uncertainty as to the most cost-effective intervention.

FUTURE WORK

Future trials should be powered to detect a method that is more cost-effective than misoprostol solution and report outcomes included in this NMA.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013005116.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Induction of labour

OBJECTIVE

To review the most current literature in order to provide evidence-based recommendations to obstetrical care providers on induction of labour.

OPTIONS

Intervention in a pregnancy with induction of labour.

OUTCOMES

Appropriate timing and method of induction, appropriate mode of delivery, and optimal maternal and perinatal outcomes.

EVIDENCE

Published literature was retrieved through searches of PubMed, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library in 2010 using appropriate controlled vocabulary (e.g., labour, induced, labour induction, cervical ripening) and key words (e.g., induce, induction, augmentation). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies. There were no date or language restrictions. Searches were updated on a regular basis and incorporated in the guideline to the end of 2010. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies.

VALUES

The evidence in this document was rated using criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on Preventative Health Care (Table 1). SUMMARY STATEMENTS: 1. Prostaglandins E(2) (cervical and vaginal) are effective agents of cervical ripening and induction of labour for an unfavourable cervix. (I) 2. Intravaginal prostaglandins E(2) are preferred to intracervical prostaglandins E(2) because they results in more timely vaginal deliveries. (I).

Obesity in pregnancy: altered onset and progression of labour

BACKGROUND

the incidence of obesity increases in all developed countries to frightful percentages, also in women of reproductive age. Maternal obesity is associated with important obstetrical complications; and this group also exhibits a higher incidence of prolonged pregnancies and labours.

OBJECTIVE

to review the literature on the pathophysiology of onset and progression of labour in obese woman and translate this knowledge into practical recommendations for clinical management.

METHODS

a literature review, in particular a critical summary of research, in order to determine associations, gaps or inconsistencies in this specific but limited body of research.

FINDINGS

the combination of a higher incidence of post-term childbirths and increased inadequate contraction pattern during the first stage of labour suggests an influence of obesity on myometrial activity. A pathophysiologic pathway for altered onset and progression of labour in obese pregnant women is proposed.

CONCLUSIONS

analysis of the literature shows that obesity is associated with an increased duration of pregnancy and prolonged duration of first stage of labour.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

an adapted clinical approach is suggested in these patients.

Methods of induction of labour: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Rates of labour induction are increasing. We conducted this systematic review to assess the evidence supporting use of each method of labour induction.

METHODS

We listed methods of labour induction then reviewed the evidence supporting each. We searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library between 1980 and November 2010 using multiple terms and combinations, including labor, induced/or induction of labor, prostaglandin or prostaglandins, misoprostol, Cytotec, 16,16,-dimethylprostaglandin E2 or E2, dinoprostone; Prepidil, Cervidil, Dinoprost, Carboprost or hemabate; prostin, oxytocin, misoprostol, membrane sweeping or membrane stripping, amniotomy, balloon catheter or Foley catheter, hygroscopic dilators, laminaria, dilapan, saline injection, nipple stimulation, intercourse, acupuncture, castor oil, herbs. We performed a best evidence review of the literature supporting each method. We identified 2048 abstracts and reviewed 283 full text articles. We preferentially included high quality systematic reviews or large randomised trials. Where no such studies existed, we included the best evidence available from smaller randomised or quasi-randomised trials.

RESULTS

We included 46 full text articles. We assigned a quality rating to each included article and a strength of evidence rating to each body of literature. Prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) and vaginal misoprostol were more effective than oxytocin in bringing about vaginal delivery within 24 hours but were associated with more uterine hyperstimulation. Mechanical methods reduced uterine hyperstimulation compared with PGE2 and misoprostol, but increased maternal and neonatal infectious morbidity compared with other methods. Membrane sweeping reduced post-term gestations. Most included studies were too small to evaluate risk for rare adverse outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Research is needed to determine benefits and harms of many induction methods.