Observational Study of Neonatal Safety for Outpatient Labour Induction Priming with Dinoprostone Vaginal Insert
- PMID: 28363606
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jogc.2017.01.003
Observational Study of Neonatal Safety for Outpatient Labour Induction Priming with Dinoprostone Vaginal Insert
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the safety of outpatient induction with dinoprostone insert in low-risk labour inductions for premature rupture of membranes or postdates gestation.
Methods: This retrospective cohort study compared outpatient labour induction priming with inpatient induction in terms of neonatal safety, mode of delivery, and obstetrical parameters. The sample included all inductions for premature rupture of membranes or postdate gestation. The analysis used logistic regression. The statistical power of the sample was 80% to detect a difference of 5.6% for the composite neonatal safety outcome (5-minute Apgar score <7 and NICU admission for >12 hours or transfer to a level III nursery).
Results: Compared with the inpatient cohort (n = 568), the outpatient cohort (n = 611) included more postdate gestations (93% vs. 67%) with less cervical dilatation (0.5 cm vs. 1.0 cm) and larger infants (3705 g vs. 3551 g). There were no differences in measures of neonatal safety or mode of delivery. The outpatient cohort required more dinoprostone inserts (1.59 vs. 1.23) and were less likely to deliver within 24 hours (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.34) but were also less likely to deliver by CS (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.95), after adjusting for obstetrical parameters.
Conclusion: An outpatient model of labour induction using dinoprostone inserts is feasible and safe.
Keywords: Labour induction; dinoprostone vaginal insert; prostaglandins.
Copyright © 2017 The Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada/La Société des obstétriciens et gynécologues du Canada. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Dinoprostone vaginal insert for labour induction: a comparison of outpatient and inpatient settings.J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2009 Nov;31(11):1028-1034. doi: 10.1016/S1701-2163(16)34347-X. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2009. PMID: 20175341
-
Maternal and neonatal outcomes following additional doses of vaginal prostaglandin E2 for induction of labour: a retrospective cohort study.Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013 Oct;170(2):364-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.07.021. Epub 2013 Aug 8. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013. PMID: 23932182
-
Comparison of two preparations of dinoprostone for pre-induction of labour in nulliparous women with very unfavourable cervical condition: a randomised clinical trial.Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2005 Apr 1;119(2):189-93. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2004.06.039. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2005. PMID: 15808378 Clinical Trial.
-
Balancing the efficacy and safety of misoprostol: a meta-analysis comparing 25 versus 50 micrograms of intravaginal misoprostol for the induction of labour.BJOG. 2015 Mar;122(4):468-76. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.12935. Epub 2014 Jul 3. BJOG. 2015. PMID: 24989790 Review.
-
Outpatient labour induction.Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2021 Nov;77:15-26. doi: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2021.08.005. Epub 2021 Aug 25. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2021. PMID: 34556409 Review.
Cited by
-
Outpatient Cervical Ripening: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Jun 1;137(6):1091-1101. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004382. Obstet Gynecol. 2021. PMID: 33752219 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of the Dinoprostone Vaginal Insert and Dinoprostone Tablet for the Induction of Labor in Primipara: A Retrospective Cohort Study.J Clin Med. 2022 Jun 19;11(12):3519. doi: 10.3390/jcm11123519. J Clin Med. 2022. PMID: 35743589 Free PMC article.
-
A Tribute to Nancy C. Chescheir, MD.Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Jan 1;137(1):1-2. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004215. Obstet Gynecol. 2021. PMID: 33278282 No abstract available.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources