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
Review
. 2022 Aug 9;27(4):251-259.
doi: 10.4103/ijnmr.ijnmr_7_21. eCollection 2022 Jul-Aug.

Effect and Safety of Castor Oil on Labor Induction and Prevalence of Vaginal Delivery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Atefeh Amerizadeh  1 , Ziba Farajzadegan  2 , Sedigheh Asgary  1
Affiliations
Review

Effect and Safety of Castor Oil on Labor Induction and Prevalence of Vaginal Delivery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Atefeh Amerizadeh et al. Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res. .

Abstract

Background: Castor oil is used in some countries to induce labor, but results on its effectiveness and safety is controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of castor oil on labor induction and prevalence of vaginal delivery along with investigating its safety.

Materials and methods: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched systematically up to September 2020. Observational studies and Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs), which assessed the effect of castor oil on labor induction in English and Persian languages using different combinations of the related key terms and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms were collected and analyzed independently by two authors. Random effect model was used for meta-analysis. The studies were included in which the Relative Risk (RR) had been reported with 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs).

Results: A total of 12 studies consisting 1653 pregnant women were included. The mean age of women who used castor oil was 24.72 years and in control group was 24.67 years. Results showed that labor induction was significantly higher in castor oil group than control group (RR: 3.27; 95% CI (1.96, 5.46)). Prevalence of vaginal delivery was 81% in the castor oil group and 69% in the control group.

Conclusions: It can be concluded that use of castor oil has positive effect on labor induction and increases the prevalence of vaginal delivery. None of the studies considered in this meta-analysis reported any serious harmful effects for the use of castor oil.

Keywords: Castor; Induced; Labor; obstetric labor; oil.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Nothing to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of detailed procedure of literature search and study selection
Figure 2
Figure 2
The mean age of pregnant women in castor oil group
Figure 3
Figure 3
The mean age of pregnant women in control group
Figure 4
Figure 4
Forest plot of effect of castor oil on labor induction RR(risk ratio)
Figure 5
Figure 5
Prevalence of vaginal delivery in castor oil group
Figure 6
Figure 6
Prevalence of vaginal delivery in control group
Figure 7
Figure 7
Percentage of risk of bias in each domain in all included RCTs
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Caughey AB, Sundaram V, Kaimal AJ, Cheng YW, Gienger A, Little SE, et al. Maternal and neonatal outcomes of elective induction of labor. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep) 2009:1–257. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Marconi AM. Recent advances in the induction of labor. F1000Res. 2019:8. F1000 Faculty Rev-829. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hall HG, McKenna LG, Griffiths DL. Complementary and alternative medicine for induction of labour. Women Birth. 2012;25:142–8. - PubMed
    1. Vogel JP, Osoti AO, Kelly AJ, Livio S, Norman JE, Alfirevic Z. Pharmacological and mechanical interventions for labour induction in outpatient settings. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;9:CD007701. - PMC - PubMed
    1. McKeon T. Castor (Ricinus communis L.) USA AOCS Press; 2016. pp. 75–112.