A randomized controlled trial of outpatient versus inpatient labour induction with vaginal controlled-release prostaglandin-E2: effectiveness and satisfaction. Elective induction of labour. A randomised prospective trial. Induction of labor with an electric breast pump. Induction of labor compared with expectant management for prelabor rupture of the membranes at term. TERMPROM Study Group. Induction of labour: a comparison of two methods with particular concern to patient acceptability. Controlled comparison of induction versus expectant care for prelabor rupture of the membranes at term. Induction of labor by intracervical prostaglandin gel and oxytocin infusion in primigravid women with unfavorable cervix. Morning compared with evening induction of labor: a nested randomized controlled trial. A nested randomized controlled trial. Induction of labour: a comparison of a single prostaglandin E2 vaginal tablet with amniotomy and intravenous oxytocin. Role of the cervix in the induction of labor. Randomised trial of outpatient induction of labor with vaginal PGE2 at 40-41 weeks of gestation versus expectant management. Start of induction of labour with oxytocin in the morning or in the evening. A randomised controlled trial. Prostaglandin E2 vaginal suppository for induction of labour: an efficient, safe and popular method. Induction of labour: a randomised clinical trial of amniotomy versus amniotomy with oxytocin infusion. [Artificial induction of labor at term for medical reasons. Comparison of 2 technics for labor induction, oxytocin + early artificial rupture of the membranes versus prostaglandin E2 vaginal gel. Open randomized controlled study]. Efficacy of outpatient induction with low-dose intravaginal prostaglandin E2: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Comparison of induced versus non-induced labor in post-term pregnancy. A randomized prospective study. Induction of labour at term with vaginal prostaglandins preparations: a randomised controlled trial of Prostin vs Propess. Is induction of labor indicated in prolonged pregnancy? Results of a prospective randomised trial. A comparative trial of labor induction with misoprostol versus oxytocin. Induction of labour at term in primigravidae with low Bishop's score: a comparison of three methods. [15-Methyl-PGF2 alpha vaginal suppository for induction of term labor].
Outpatient management in obstetrics is expanding, but evidence to support outpatient labour induction is needed.
                To compare the effectiveness, acceptability, duration of hospitalization, and safety of outpatient and inpatient induction of labour with intravaginal controlled-release prosta-glandin-E2 (CR-PGE2).
                A prospective, randomized, controlled trial enrolled 300 women at term with parity < or = 5 and singleton pregnancies in cephalic presentation. Each had an unscarred uterus, a normal non-stress test (NST), and a Bishop score of < or = 6. After insertion of the CR-PGE2, and 1 hour of monitoring, those in the outpatient group were discharged home, to return with onset of labour or 12 hours later for an NST. If not already in labour 24 hours later, the women returned for inpatient induction. Vaginal examination was not repeated before 24 hours unless the patient was contracting and required analgesia. Inpatients remained on the antepartum ward but were otherwise treated similarly. The women in both groups reported ratings of satisfaction, pain, and anxiety over the telephone until they were in labour.
                There were 150 women randomized to outpatient and 150 women to inpatient induction of labour. The number of women who were in labour or who delivered by 24 hours in the outpatient group was 115 (0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70-0.84) and in the inpatient group was 107 (0.72, 95% CI 0.64-0.79). The median times to labour were 9.8 hours (95% CI, 8.1-11.4) and 11.4 hours (95% CI, 10.1-12.7), and to delivery were 21.4 hours (95% CI, 19.2-23.5) and 20.7 hours (95% CI, 18.4-23.0), for the outpatient and inpatient groups, respectively. In the outpatient group, 56% of women reported high satisfaction during the initial 12 hours of induction compared to 39% in the inpatient group (p < 0.008). Ratings of pain and anxiety during the first 12 hours of induction were similar. In the outpatient group, women were at home for a median of 8 hours (95% CI, 6.7-9.4) before labour and delivery. There were no significant differences in adverse outcomes.
                This study suggests that outpatient induction of labour with intravaginal CR-PGE2 may be a reasonable option for selected low-risk women; however, further study is needed to confirm the safety of this approach. In a prospective, randomised trial, 111 obstetrically normal pregnant women, who had elective induction of labour performed between 39 and 40 weeks, were compared with 117 controls who were managed expectantly until 41 weeks. Compared with the controls, the patients who had elective induction of labour had significantly less meconium staining in labour and a smaller blood-loss after delivery. The mean length of labour, the amount of pethidine used, and the Apgar scores at 1 minute were similar in the two groups. In the electively induced group, the caesarean-section rate was lower and the use of epidural analgesia more common than in the controls, but the differences were mot statistically signficant. The hour of delivery was similar in the two groups, suggesting that convenience to medical and nursing staff would not be greatly changed by elective induction of labour. There was no evidence that the hazards to mother and child were increased by elective induction, and its use might improve perinatal mortality by reducing the number of unexplained mature stillbirths. Nipple stimulation with an electric breast pump was compared with oxytocin infusion as a means of labor induction. The time from stimulation to the onset of regular uterine activity and to 200 Montevideo units of uterine activity and the time until entrance into the active phase of labor were significantly shorter in the nipple stimulation group. Once the women were in active labor, there was no difference between the groups in the length of labor or mode of delivery. As the interval between rupture of the fetal membranes at term and delivery increases, so may the risk of fetal and maternal infection. It is not known whether inducing labor will reduce this risk or whether one method of induction is better then another.
                We studied 5041 women with prelabor rupture of the membranes at term. The women were randomly assigned to induction of labor with intravenous oxytocin; induction of labor with vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel; or expectant management for up to four days, with labor induced with either intravenous oxytocin or vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel if complications developed. The primary outcome was neonatal infection. Secondary outcomes were the need for cesarean section and women's evaluations of their treatment.
                The rates of neonatal infection and cesarean section were not significantly different among the study groups. The rates of neonatal infection were 2.0 percent for the induction-with-oxytocin group, 3.0 percent for the induction-with-prostaglandin group, 2.8 percent for the expectant-management (oxytocin) group, and 2.7 percent for the expectant-management (prostaglandin) group. The rates of cesarean section ranged from 9.6 to 10.9 percent. Clinical chorioamnionitis was less likely to develop in the women in the induction-with-oxytocin group than in those in the expectant-management (oxytocin) group (4.0 percent vs. 8.6 percent, P<0.001), as was postpartum fever (1.9 percent vs. 3.6 percent, P=0.008). Women in the induction groups were less likely to say they liked "nothing" about their treatment than those in the expectant-management groups.
                In women with prelabor rupture of the membranes at term, induction of labor with oxytocin or prostaglandin E2 and expectant management result in similar rates of neonatal infection and cesarean section. Induction of labor with intravenous oxytocin results in a lower risk of maternal infection than does expectant management. Women view induction of labor more positively than expectant management. Induction of labour is a common obstetric intervention. When the cervix is unfavourable ripening agents are used, commonly prostaglandin E2. There are several methods of administration of prostaglandin E2 and little comparative work has been performed as to their acceptability by patients. Patients undergoing induction of labour by prostaglandin E2 were randomised to receive either intravaginal gel or an intravaginal slow-release pessary. Patient satisfaction with the method received was then assessed. Sixty-nine patients were randomised, 34 to receive gel and 35 to receive a pessary. Median scores for satisfaction of the induction process were the same for both methods; however, satisfaction with the labour was increased with those who had been randomised to the pessary group (median pessary=5, gel=4). There may be a marginal improvement in patient satisfaction when a slow-release intravaginal prostaglandin E2 pessary is used for the induction of labour. This randomized clinical trial compared oxytocin induction of labor with expectant care for 48 hours after prelabor rupture of the membranes at term. Women at term with prelabor rupture of the membranes for at least 8 hours were assigned at random to induction with oxytocin or to expectant management for 48 hours followed by induction if necessary. Of 168 eligible women, 123 (73%) agreed to participate. More women in the induction group (23%) than in the expectant group (10%) had operative delivery, either cesarean section or instrumental vaginal delivery. In the induction group 41% received analgesia versus 24% in the expectant group (p < 0.005). There was no difference in the rate of maternal and neonatal infection between groups and sepsis was not observed. The active policy of oxytocin induction exposed the mother to a higher risk of operative delivery and a less comfortable labor than the 48 hours expectant care option. The rate of Cesarean Section for failed induction of labor and maternal and fetal compilations are high when labor is induced in a nulliparas women with an unripe cervix by amniotomy and oxytocin infusion. Prostaglandins (PG) in different forms have been used for ripening the cervix with an aim of reducing these problems. A prospective randomized trial was performed on one hundred primigravid women between 37 and 42 weeks of gestation with singleton pregnancy, cephalic presentation and unfavorable cervix (Modified Bishop Score < or = 5) in the department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology of Institute of Postgraduate Medicine & Research from 1st May 1996 to 30th April 1997. In this study the efficiency of prostaglandin E2 intracervical (PGE2 IC) gel in induction of labor in a group of primigravid women with unripe cervix was assessed and compared with another group with similar characteristics using oxytocin infusion and artificial rupture of membrane (ARM). The Modified Bishop Score (MBS), interval between IOL and onset of labor and the duration of labor after insertion of PGE2 gel was significantly different from those of oxytocin infusion group. But the Apgar Score at 1 & 5 min had shown no statistically significant difference. Any significant difference could also not be detected in the mode of delivery between the two induction group. The proportion of emergency Cesarean Section (CS) was high in the oxytocin infusion group than that of in the prostaglandin group. There was also no significant difference regarding the acceptability of both the induction methods. To test the hypothesis that commencing induction of labor in the morning more closely reflects the physiologic timing of onset of labor and is associated with fewer women who remain undelivered 24 hours after cervical ripening and induction begins.
                This was a nested randomized clinical trial, conducted between April 2001 and December 2004. Pregnant women at more than 36+6 weeks gestation with a cephalic presentation who were scheduled for prostaglandin induction of labor were eligible to participate. Women were randomly assigned to either admission in the morning (0800 hours) or admission in the evening (2,000 hours). The primary outcome measures were vaginal birth not achieved in 24 hours, uterine hyperstimulation with associated fetal heart rate changes, and cesarean delivery.
                A total of 620 women were entered in the trial, with 280 women in the morning admission group and 340 women in the evening admission group. There were no statistically significant differences between the timing of admission for induction and the primary trial outcomes. However, women admitted in the morning were less likely to require oxytocin infusion (morning admission 126 of 280 [45.0%] compared with evening admission 184 of 340 [54.1%]; relative risk 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.70-0.97; P=.022). Nulliparous women admitted in the morning were less likely to require operative vaginal birth (morning admission 10 of 62 [16.1%] compared with evening admission 28 of 82 [34.2%]; relative risk 0.47, 95% confidence interval 0.25-0.90; P=.015).
                For women who require induction of labor, consideration should be given to admission in the morning rather than admission in the evening.
                Australian Clinical Trials Registry, www.actr.org.au, 12606000156583. In a randomized controlled study of 100 women of low parity and favourable induction features, induction of labour by means of a single vaginal tablet containing 3 mg of prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) was compared with the conventional method of amniotomy and intravenous oxytocin. Four of the patients (8%) who received the prostaglandin tablet required additional intravenous oxytocin to achieve delivery. The prostaglandin group had a longer mean overall induction-delivery interval but a shorter amniotomy-delivery interval than the oxytocin group. One patient in the PGE2 group and two in the oxytocin group required caesarean section. The PGE2 treated patients expressed a higher level of satisfaction with their method of induction, they required less analgesia, had less blood loss at delivery and their babies had a lower incidence of neonatal jaundice. A study on induction of labor was carried out to test the hypothesis that changing the cervix will enhance the effectiveness of induction of labor. Fifty pregnant women near term with Bishop scores of 4 or less were divided into 5 study groups, in which a 12-hour preparation phase procedure was carried out to produce cervical or myometrial changes. All women had continuous measurement of uterine activity by an extraovular catheter. The patients were divided into 1) control subjects, and into groups treated with 2) laminaria, 3) Foley catheter, 4) amniotomy, and 5) oxytocin infusion. These preparation techniques were used for 12 hours, after which rupture of membranes was carried out in all cases. Although all procedures significantly changed the cervix, none but oxytocin affected the induction-to-delivery interval. The authors concluded that when a study design rigidly controls for cervical Bishop score, timing of rupture of membranes, and oxytocin infusion rates, the cervical preparation alone will not enhance inducibility. Two hundred consecutive women with uncomplicated pregnancies, at or within 4 days of their expected date of confinement, were prospectively randomized into 2 groups. One group had expectant management, with twice weekly surveillance tests, while the other group had 3 mg of vaginal prostaglandin E2 as outpatient treatment. There were 104 women in the expectant group and 70 in the induction group (26 women allocated to induction preferred no treatment). The average number of days to delivery was 1.6 in the induction group and 5.2 in the expectant group (p < 0.001). While meconium was much less frequent in the induction group (p < 0.002), all other outcome measures, including cesarean section rates, incidence of macrosomia, and Apgar scores, were similar in the two groups. The objective of this study was to compare outcomes of induced labour with intravenous oxytocin with a start in the evening versus in the morning.
                Randomised controlled trial.
                Labour wards of three hospitals in Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
                Women with an indication for induction of labour with intravenous oxytocin.
                Included women were randomized to either the evening group with a start of induction of labour at 21:00 hours, or the morning group with a start at 07:00 hours.
                Primary outcome was duration of labour. Secondary outcomes were instrumental delivery rate, adverse neonatal outcome defined as an Apgar score below 7 after 5 minutes, number and indications of paediatric consults and neonatal admissions, duration of second stage, number of intrapartum infections and necessity of pain relief.
                We randomised 371 women. Mean duration of labour was not significantly different (primiparae: morning 12 hours and 8 minutes versus evening 11 hours and 22 minutes, P value 0.29; multiparae: morning 7 hours and 34 minutes versus evening 7 hours and 46 minutes, P value 0.70). There were no significant differences in instrumental deliveries rates, number of infections or patient satisfaction. Unexpectedly, neonatal outcome was better in women induced in the evening.
                Induction of labour with intravenous oxytocin in the evening is equally effective as induction in the morning. Two different methods for induction of labour were randomly used in 100 women with a favourable cervix. The patients were treated with either prostaglandin vaginal suppositories containing 2.5 mg PGE2 in a base of Witepsol S55 (Dynamit Nobel) or intravenous infusion of oxytocin. The PGE2 vaginal suppository was significantly more efficient than the intravenous infusion of oxytocin in relation to the time interval from the start of induction of labour to delivery. Also the percentage of women who delivered within 48 hours (success rate) was higher in the suppository group. Significantly more women in the suppository group found this induction method recommendable. To compare two methods of induction of labour-amniotomy with oxytocin infusion versus amniotomy alone.
                Prospective randomised clinical trial.
                The department of obstetrics in a Swedish central hospital.
                One hundred and ninety-six pregnant women with indication for induction of labour at term and a favourable cervix (modified Bishop score > or = 6).
                The women were randomised to amniotomy followed by oxytocin infusion after 1 h (group A, n = 98) or amniotomy alone (group B, n = 98). If labour had not ensued on the following morning, after approximately 24 h, the women in group B were given an oxytocin infusion.
                Induction-delivery interval, duration of labour, time spent in delivery ward, oxytocin use, maternal and neonatal clinical outcome.
                Amniotomy combined with early oxytocin infusion resulted in shorter induction-delivery interval (median 6.0 h; 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.0 to 6.5 h) than amniotomy alone (median 9.0 h; 95% CI 7.5 to 10.0 h). This was due to a shorter latent period in the former group (median 2.3 h; 95% CI 2.0 to 3.0 h) compared to the latter (median 4.3 h; 95% CI 3.0 to 5.5 h). The duration of labour stages 1 and 2 were similar in both groups. The time spent in the delivery ward was slightly reduced for women managed by amniotomy alone (median 5.0 h; 95% CI 4.5 to 6.0 h) compared with those managed by the combination of amniotomy and oxytocin infusion (median 6.0 h; 95% CI 5.0 to 6.5 h). Eighty-seven percent in group A and 32% in group B were given oxytocin, and the total oxytocin infusion time was nearly five times longer in group A. No other important effect on maternal or fetal outcomes was demonstrated.
                With regard to safety the results do not warrant recommending either type of labour induction. The minor differences observed between the induction groups justify an individual management policy, with attention paid to both the indication for induction of labour and the woman's choice. Labor induction for medical reasons is a situation rather well-controlled by the combination: "oxytocin-amniotomy" when the cervix is favorably open. However, new induction techniques are currently under study, especially vaginal administration of PGE2 which presents the advantage of being simple to administer and better accepted by the patients. This study compared the classical technique, oxytocin perfusion and early artificial rupture of the membranes, with the vaginal administration of PGE2 gel (first dose: 1 mg, second dose 1 or 2 mg, six hours later). The success rate of both techniques is comparable, approximately 70 p. cent. Also, the times between amniotomy and delivery are identical, approximately 5 hours. On the contrary, the lapses of time between the onset of the induction and the delivery, vary significantly, being always longer in the PGE2 group. However, the dose of vaginal PGE2 gel as well as the time of artificial membrane rupture could be modified in order to decrease the delay of the effect. Our purpose was to determine whether a protocol for outpatient induction is safe and effective for initiating labor.
                A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was performed with 100 low-risk patients having well-dated pregnancies. Women with a Bishop score < or = 6 at 38 to 40 weeks' gestation were administered either 2 mg of intravaginal prostaglandin E2 gel or placebo for 5 consecutive days as outpatients while undergoing fetal monitoring.
                The median interval from randomization to delivery was 4 days in the prostaglandin E2 group (range 0 to 28 days) versus 10 days in the placebo group (range 0 to 26 days, p = 0.002). Twenty-seven of 50 patients (54%) in the prostaglandin E2 group were admitted for labor during the dosing interval compared with 10 placebo-treated patients (20%, p = 0.001). The mean gestational age at delivery was significantly reduced in the treatment group (39.9 +/- 1.0 weeks vs 40.5 +/- 0.99 weeks, p = 0.003) as was the incidence of postdates pregnancy (40% vs 66%, p = 0.016). Hyperstimulation was observed in one prostaglandin E2-treated patient, but no intervention was required.
                Outpatient low-dose prostaglandin E2 gel administration is effective for initiating labor in patients with an unfavorable cervix and appears safe if performed with adequate monitoring. To determine the proper management of pregnancy in uncomplicated cases going beyond 42 weeks.
                Randomized controlled trial of induction of labor at or shortly after the 42-week limit, versus close monitoring without induction except when indicated for medical reasons.
                Hospital's obstetrical department
                188 pregnant women, randomly allocated to two groups with 94 in each.
                Induction of labor by stripping of membranes and i.v. oxytocin infusion, with artificial rupture of membranes when the cervical opening was 3 cm or more in diameter. The control group was followed with clinical, biochemical and electronic tests, intervention being applied according to needs.
                Frequency and modes of operative delivery, maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality.
                The distribution of gestational age (in weeks) at birth was almost identical in the two groups, but there were more operative deliveries in the control group than in the induction group (64 versus 48, p less than 0.05). Maternal complications and perinatal morbidity rates were equally distributed between the groups. There was one perinatal death in the induction group and two deaths among the controls.
                With due reservation for small numbers, routine induction after term may result in fewer operative deliveries. No other advantage has been demonstrated when compared with close monitoring and intervention when medically indicated. The purpose of the trial was to determine whether a sustained release preparation of prostaglandin E2 (Propess) is better in inducing labour when compared with the more widely used short-acting (instant-release) preparation (Prostin). A randomised controlled clinical trial involving 100 pregnant women at term with an indication for induction of labour was conducted in a district general hospital in the UK over a 1-year period. Women were randomised to receive one of the two preparations. The study revealed that there was no statistically significant difference in time to onset of labour, duration of labour, total time from induction to delivery, method of delivery, and analgesia requirements. The number of preparations required to induce labour were significantly less in the Propess group. Our data suggest that both Propess and Prostin are safe and effective in induction of labour, for either primips or multips. However, Prostin use is more cost-effective. In 345 women with a favorable cervical score at due date, labor was either induced by means of intravaginal application of tablets containing 3 mg of prostaglandin E2 or spontaneous onset of labor was awaited until the 42nd week of pregnancy. Eighty percent of the nulliparae and 96.3% of the multiparae of the induction group gave birth within 24 h of the administration of the first tablet. All pertinent delivery intervals were significantly shorter in this group compared to those women where spontaneous onset of labor was awaited. The rate of operative deliveries was lower in the induction group. With the exception of 1 fetal death 3 days after due date, fetal outcome was excellent in both groups. Elective induction was at least equivalent to awaiting the onset of spontaneous labor and was not associated with higher complication rates due to the method of induction. To determine the efficacy and safety of intravaginal misoprostol compared with intravenous oxytocin in cervical ripening and labor induction.
                The study was carried out at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the Hospital Loayza, Lima, Peru. The sample included 123 pregnant women with any indication for labor induction. The study was prospective and randomized. We compared the effect of 50 micrograms of intravaginal misoprostol administered every 4 h up to 600 micrograms with that observed using the standard protocol of oxytocin by continuous infusion.
                57 patients with misoprostol (group 1) and 63 with oxytocin (group 2) were enrolled. Delivery occurred in 45 patients (78.9%) in group 1 and in 37 (58.7%) in group 2 (P < 0.017). Complications including tachysystole, uterine hypertony and hyperstimulation were higher in group 1, 21.1% than in group 2, 7.9% (P < 0.04). The incidence of cesarean section in both groups was similar to the overall incidence in our center. No differences were observed between groups in perinatal and postpartum adverse outcomes. The interval from start of induction to vaginal delivery was significantly shorter in the oxytocin group (8.4 +/- 4.1 vs. 11.3 +/- 6.9 h, P < 0.005).
                Intravaginal administration of misoprostol is a safe and effective alternative for cervical ripening and labor induction. Maternal and neonatal complications did not increase significantly. To determine which of three methods of induction of labour at term in primigravidae with a low Bishop's score is effective and safe.
                Random allocation to Prostin E2 and amniotomy later (Group A); low amniotomy and oxytocin titration (Group B); and intra-cervical Foley balloon overnight followed next morning by low amniotomy and oxytocin titration (Group C).
                Primigravidae (n = 90) in the University Hospitals, Benin City, Nigeria.
                (i) Time taken to achieve 3 uterine contractions in 10 min; (ii) induction-delivery interval.
                The mean time interval between intervention and regular uterine contractions was shortest in Group C (A vs. C, P < 0.02; A vs. B, P < 0.02). The mean induction-delivery interval was shortest in Group C (11.1 h) followed by Group B (13.9 h) and Group C (17.9 h) P < 0.05-0.001.
                The induction-delivery interval was shortest when using a Foley catheter for cervical ripening followed by amniotomy and oxytocin titration. The results of intravaginal 15-methyl PGF2 alpha (PG05) were compared with gemeprost (ONO-802, PGE1 analogue) pessary and oxytocin intravenous infusion for induction of labor at term. A total of 99 primipara with singleton pregnancy and cephalic presentation, accepted for induction, was randomly allocated into 3 groups: group 1, PG05 0.25 mg (n = 33), group 2, ONO-802 0.125 mg (n = 33), and group 3, oxytocin i.v. (n = 33). Among these, 30 cases had plasma PGs (PGE2 and PGF2 alpha) concentration determined before and after induction. Successful treatment was defined as active labor starting within 24 hours following induction or an increase of cervical Bishop score > 3. The success rates were not significantly different among the 3 groups (PG05 88%, ONO-802 100%, and oxytocin 79%), (P > 0.05). No significant difference existed in the plasma prostaglandin concentrations as well. It is suggested that PG05 may be used for induction of labor at term.
Induction of labour in outpatient settings appears feasible. We do not have sufficient evidence to know which induction methods are preferred by women, or the interventions that are most effective and safe to use in outpatient settings.