Elective induction of labor: A prospective observational study
- PMID: 30496265
- PMCID: PMC6264859
- DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0208098
Elective induction of labor: A prospective observational study
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to assess indications for induction and describe the characteristics and delivery outcome in medical compared to non-medical/elective inductions. During a three-month period, 1663 term inductions were registered in 24 delivery units in Norway. Inclusion criteria were singleton pregnancies with cephalic presentation at gestational age 37+0 and beyond. Indications, pre-induction Bishop scores, mode of delivery and adverse maternal and fetal outcomes were registered, and compared between the medically indicated and elective induction groups. Ten percent of the inductions were elective, and the four most common indications were maternal request (35%), a previous negative delivery experience or difficult obstetric history (19%), maternal fatigue/tiredness (17%) and anxiety (15%). Nearly half of these inductions were performed at 39+0-40+6 weeks. There were fewer nulliparous women in the elective compared to the medically indicated induction group, 16% vs. 52% (p<0.05). The cesarean section rate in the elective induction group was 14% and 17% in the medically indicated group (14% vs. 17%, OR = 0.8, 95% CI 0.5-1.3). We found that one in ten inductions in Norway is performed without a strict medical indication and 86% of these inductions resulted in vaginal delivery.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Similar articles
-
Maternal and newborn outcomes with elective induction of labor at term.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Mar;220(3):273.e1-273.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.01.223. Epub 2019 Feb 17. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019. PMID: 30716284
-
Term Elective Induction of Labor and Pregnancy Outcomes Among Obese Women and Their Offspring.Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Jan;131(1):12-22. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002408. Obstet Gynecol. 2018. PMID: 29215512 Free PMC article.
-
Induction of labor and nulliparity: A nationwide clinical practice pilot evaluation.Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020 Dec;99(12):1700-1709. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13948. Epub 2020 Jul 27. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020. PMID: 32609877
-
[INDUCTION OF LABOR AT 39 WEEKS OF GESTATION VERSUS EXPECTANT MANAGEMENT].Harefuah. 2019 Dec;158(12):802-806. Harefuah. 2019. PMID: 31823535 Review. Hebrew.
-
[In case of fetal macrosomia, the best strategy is the induction of labor at 38 weeks of gestation].J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2016 Nov;45(9):1037-1044. doi: 10.1016/j.jgyn.2016.09.001. Epub 2016 Oct 19. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris). 2016. PMID: 27771202 Review. French.
Cited by
-
Sleep disturbances in late pregnancy: associations with induction of labor.Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2024 Oct;310(4):2045-2053. doi: 10.1007/s00404-024-07492-4. Epub 2024 Apr 5. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2024. PMID: 38580856 Free PMC article.
-
Oxytocin-induced birth causes sex-specific behavioral and brain connectivity changes in developing rat offspring.iScience. 2024 Jan 22;27(2):108960. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.108960. eCollection 2024 Feb 16. iScience. 2024. PMID: 38327784 Free PMC article.
-
Trends in labor induction indications: A 20-year population-based study.Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2022 Dec;101(12):1422-1430. doi: 10.1111/aogs.14447. Epub 2022 Sep 16. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2022. PMID: 36114700 Free PMC article.
-
Recent advances in the induction of labor.F1000Res. 2019 Oct 30;8:F1000 Faculty Rev-1829. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.17587.1. eCollection 2019. F1000Res. 2019. PMID: 31723412 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Comparison of pregnancy outcomes between induction of labor at 40 weeks and 41 weeks in low-risk women with Singleton pregnancies: a retrospective cohort study.BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2025 May 17;25(1):586. doi: 10.1186/s12884-025-07691-0. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2025. PMID: 40382564 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Osterman MJ, Curtin SC, Matthews TJ. Births: Final Data for 2014. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2015;64(12):1–64. . - PubMed
-
- Mealing NM, Roberts CL, Ford JB, Simpson JM, Morris JM. Trends in induction of labour, 1998–2007: a population-based study. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2009;49(6):599–605. 10.1111/j.1479-828X.2009.01086.x . - DOI - PubMed
-
- EURO-PERISTAT. The European Perinatal Health Report 2010. [cited 2016 Dec 11] Available from: http://www.europeristat.com/images/doc/EPHR2010_w_disclaimer.pdf.
-
- Medical Birth Registry of Norway. [cited 2016 Dec 19] Available from: http://www.fhi.no/helseregistre/medisinsk-fodselsregister
-
- Coulm B, Blondel B, Alexander S, Boulvain M, Le Ray C. Elective induction of labour and maternal request: a national population-based study. BJOG. 2015. 10.1111/1471-0528.13805 . - DOI - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources