Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2015 Dec;126(6):1258-1264.
doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001154.

Elective Induction of Labor Compared With Expectant Management of Nulliparous Women at 39 Weeks of Gestation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Nathaniel R Miller  1 , Rebecca L Cypher, Lisa M Foglia, Jason A Pates, Peter E Nielsen
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Elective Induction of Labor Compared With Expectant Management of Nulliparous Women at 39 Weeks of Gestation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Nathaniel R Miller et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Dec.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate whether the elective induction of labor in nulliparous women with an unfavorable cervix affects the cesarean delivery rate.

Methods: We conducted a randomized controlled trial at a tertiary care medical center. Nulliparous woman between 38 0/7 and 38 6/7 weeks of gestation who were least 18 years of age with a singleton gestation and a Bishop score of 5 or less were randomized to elective induction of labor or expectant management. The induction of labor group was induced within 1 week of enrollment but not before 39 0/7 weeks of gestation. The control group continued routine prenatal care with admission for labor or obstetric indication. The primary outcome was cesarean delivery. Assuming a 20% rate in women in a control group, 80% power, and a goal to detect a twofold increase to 40% in the induction of labor group, 162 patients were needed.

Results: From March 2010 to February 2014, 82 patients were randomly allocated to induction of labor and 80 to expectant management. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The cesarean delivery rate in the induction of labor group was 30.5% (25/82) compared with 17.7% (14/79) in the expectant management group (relative risk 1.72, 95% confidence interval 0.96-3.06).

Conclusion: In nulliparous women with a Bishop score of 5 or less, elective induction after 39 0/7 weeks of gestation compared with expectant management of pregnancy did not double the rate of cesarean delivery.

Clinical trial registraction: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01076062.

Level of evidence: I.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Induction of labor. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 107. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 2009;114:386–97.
    1. Osterman MJ, Martin JA. Recent declines in induction of labor by gestational age. NCHS Data Brief 2014:1–8.
    1. Clark SL, Miller DD, Belfort MA, Dildy GA, Frye DK, Meyers JA. Neonatal and maternal outcomes associated with elective term delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009;200:156.e1–4.
    1. Grobman WA. Elective induction: When? Ever? Clin Obstet Gynecol 2007;50:537–46.
    1. Caughey AB. Nonmedically indicated induction of labor: are the benefits worth the cost? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2015;212:7–8.

Publication types

Associated data