Maternal perceptions of the experience of attempted labor induction and medically elective inductions: analysis of survey results from listening to mothers in California
- PMID: 32787802
- PMCID: PMC7425604
- DOI: 10.1186/s12884-020-03137-x
Maternal perceptions of the experience of attempted labor induction and medically elective inductions: analysis of survey results from listening to mothers in California
Abstract
Background: The rate of induction of labor in the U.S. has risen from 9.6% in 1990 to 25.7% in 2018, including 31.7% of first-time births. Recent studies that have examined inductions have been small qualitative studies or relied on either medical records or administrative data. This study examines induction from the perspective of those women who experienced it, with a particular focus on the prevalence and predictors of inductions for nonmedical indications, women's experience of pressure to induce labor and the relationship between the attempt to medically initiate labor and cesarean section.
Methods: Study data are drawn from the 2119 respondents to the Listening to Mothers in California survey who were planning to have a vaginal birth in 2016. Mothers were asked if there had been an attempt to medically initiate labor, if it actually started labor, if they felt pressured to have the induction, if they had a cesarean and the reason for the induction. Reasons for induction were classified as either medically indicated or elective.
Results: Almost half (47%) of our respondents indicated an attempt was made to medically induce their labor, and 71% of those attempts initiated labor. More than a third of the attempts (37%) were elective. Attempted induction overall was most strongly associated with giving birth at 41+ weeks (aOR 3.28; 95% C.I. 2.21-4.87). Elective inductions were more likely among multiparous mothers and in pregnancies at 39 or 40 weeks. The perception of being pressured to have labor induced was related to higher levels of education, maternal preference for less medical intervention in birth, having an obstetrician compared to a midwife and gestational ages of 41+ weeks. Cesarean birth was more likely in the case of overall induction (aOR 1.51; 95% C.I. 1.11-2.07) and especially following a failed attempt at labor induction (aOR 4.50; 95% C.I. 2.93-6.90).
Conclusion: Clinicians counselling mothers concerning the need for labor induction should be aware of mothers' perceptions about birth and engage in true shared decision making in order to avoid the maternal perception of being pressured into labor induction.
Keywords: Cesarean section; Elective induction; Labor induction; Listening to mothers.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Figures
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
-
Intrapartum Care and Experiences of Women with Midwives Versus Obstetricians in the Listening to Mothers in California Survey.J Midwifery Womens Health. 2020 Jan;65(1):45-55. doi: 10.1111/jmwh.13027. Epub 2019 Aug 26. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2020. PMID: 31448884 Free PMC article.
-
Elective induction of labor: A prospective observational study.PLoS One. 2018 Nov 29;13(11):e0208098. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0208098. eCollection 2018. PLoS One. 2018. PMID: 30496265 Free PMC article.
-
Elective induction of labor.Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2006 Sep;49(3):698-704. doi: 10.1097/00003081-200609000-00026. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2006. PMID: 16885673 Review.
-
Delivery for women with a previous cesarean: guidelines for clinical practice from the French College of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (CNGOF).Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013 Sep;170(1):25-32. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.05.015. Epub 2013 Jun 28. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013. PMID: 23810846 Review.
Cited by
-
Labor Induction with Intravaginal Misoprostol versus Spontaneous Labor: Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes.Biomed Res Int. 2022 Dec 9;2022:2826927. doi: 10.1155/2022/2826927. eCollection 2022. Biomed Res Int. 2022. PMID: 36531654 Free PMC article.
-
Offering women a choice in induction of labour: a prospective cohort study.Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2023 Jun;307(6):1781-1788. doi: 10.1007/s00404-022-06652-8. Epub 2022 Jun 15. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2023. PMID: 35704114
-
The Childbirth Experience Survey (CBEX): An Analysis of Qualitative Survey data.Matern Child Health J. 2025 Apr;29(4):457-464. doi: 10.1007/s10995-025-04043-4. Epub 2025 Feb 5. Matern Child Health J. 2025. PMID: 39907945 Free PMC article.
-
Lived experiences of women during induction of labour at a tertiary hospital in Ghana: A qualitative study.PLOS Glob Public Health. 2024 Feb 15;4(2):e0002290. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0002290. eCollection 2024. PLOS Glob Public Health. 2024. PMID: 38359028 Free PMC article.
-
A prolonged latent phase: An early career in oxytocin during birth.Compr Psychoneuroendocrinol. 2023 Jun 22;15:100190. doi: 10.1016/j.cpnec.2023.100190. eCollection 2023 Aug. Compr Psychoneuroendocrinol. 2023. PMID: 37405229 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Natality public-use data 2016–2018, on CDC WONDER Online Database. Division of Vital Statistics, 2020. (Accessed 3/17/2020, 2020, at http://wonder.cdc.gov/natality-expanded-current.html ).
-
- Martin J, Hamilton B, Osterman M, Driscoll A, Drake P. Births: final data for 2017. Hyattsville, MD. 2018. - PubMed
-
- National Vital Statistics System. 2017 National Public use Datafile,. In: National Center for Health Statistics, ed.2019.
-
- Souter V, Painter I, Sitcov K, Caughey AB. Maternal and newborn outcomes with elective induction of labor at term. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;220:273. - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical