Systematic review: elective induction of labor versus expectant management of pregnancy
- PMID: 19687492
- DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00007
Systematic review: elective induction of labor versus expectant management of pregnancy
Abstract
Background: The rates of induction of labor and elective induction of labor are increasing. Whether elective induction of labor improves outcomes or simply leads to greater complications and health care costs is commonly debated in the literature.
Purpose: To compare the benefits and harms of elective induction of labor and expectant management of pregnancy.
Data sources: MEDLINE (through February 2009), Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (through March 2009), bibliographies of included studies, and previous systematic reviews.
Study selection: Experimental and observational studies of elective induction of labor reported in English.
Data extraction: Two authors abstracted study design; patient characteristics; quality criteria; and outcomes, including cesarean delivery and maternal and neonatal morbidity.
Data synthesis: Of 6117 potentially relevant articles, 36 met inclusion criteria: 11 randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) and 25 observational studies. Overall, expectant management of pregnancy was associated with a higher odds ratio (OR) of cesarean delivery than was elective induction of labor (OR, 1.22 [95% CI, 1.07 to 1.39]; absolute risk difference, 1.9 percentage points [CI, 0.2 to 3.7 percentage points]) in 9 RCTs. Women at or beyond 41 completed weeks of gestation who were managed expectantly had a higher risk for cesarean delivery (OR, 1.21 [CI, 1.01 to 1.46]), but this difference was not statistically significant in women at less than 41 completed weeks of gestation (OR, 1.73 [CI, 0.67 to 4.5]). Women who were expectantly managed were more likely to have meconium-stained amniotic fluid than those who were electively induced (OR, 2.04 [CI, 1.34 to 3.09]).
Limitations: There were no recent RCTs of elective induction of labor at less than 41 weeks of gestation. The 2 studies conducted at less than 41 weeks of gestation were of poor quality and were not generalizable to current practice.
Conclusion: RCTs suggest that elective induction of labor at 41 weeks of gestation and beyond is associated with a decreased risk for cesarean delivery and meconium-stained amniotic fluid. There are concerns about the translation of these findings into actual practice; thus, future studies should examine elective induction of labor in settings where most obstetric care is provided.
Comment in
-
Elective induction of labor: waking the sleeping dogma?Ann Intern Med. 2009 Aug 18;151(4):281-2. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00012. Ann Intern Med. 2009. PMID: 19687495 No abstract available.
-
Elective induction, selective deduction, and cesarean section.Birth. 2010 Sep;37(3):252-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-536X.2010.00413.x. Birth. 2010. PMID: 20887542
Similar articles
-
Maternal and neonatal outcomes of elective induction of labor.Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep). 2009 Mar;(176):1-257. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Full Rep). 2009. PMID: 19408970 Free PMC article. Review.
-
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
-
Association between timing of labor induction and neonatal and maternal outcomes: an observational study from China.Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2024 Oct;6(10):101456. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101456. Epub 2024 Aug 15. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2024. PMID: 39151749
-
Comparison of Maternal Labor-Related Complications and Neonatal Outcomes Following Elective Induction of Labor at 39 Weeks of Gestation vs Expectant Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA Netw Open. 2023 May 1;6(5):e2313162. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.13162. JAMA Netw Open. 2023. PMID: 37171818 Free PMC article.
-
[To the question of elective induction of labor at 39 weeks of gestation, the answer lies in the question].Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol. 2018 May;46(5):481-488. doi: 10.1016/j.gofs.2018.03.009. Epub 2018 Apr 12. Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol. 2018. PMID: 29656952 Review. French.
Cited by
-
Comparison of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes between induction and expectant management among women with gestational diabetes mellitus at term pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2023 Jul 12;23(1):509. doi: 10.1186/s12884-023-05779-z. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2023. PMID: 37438706 Free PMC article.
-
A predictive model for successfully inducing active labor among pregnant women: Combining cervical status assessment and clinical characteristics.Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X. 2023 May 3;18:100196. doi: 10.1016/j.eurox.2023.100196. eCollection 2023 Jun. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X. 2023. PMID: 37214157 Free PMC article.
-
Adverse neonatal outcomes and associated factors among mothers who gave birth through induced and spontaneous labor in public hospitals of Awi zone, Northwest Ethiopia: a comparative cross-sectional study.BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2023 May 2;23(1):307. doi: 10.1186/s12884-023-05631-4. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2023. PMID: 37131132 Free PMC article.
-
Differences in Determinants: Racialized Obstetric Care and Increases in U.S. State Labor Induction Rates.J Health Soc Behav. 2023 Jun;64(2):174-191. doi: 10.1177/00221465231165284. Epub 2023 Apr 26. J Health Soc Behav. 2023. PMID: 37098856 Free PMC article.
-
Factors associated with adverse obstetric events following induction of labour: a retrospective study in a tertiary hospital in Ghana.Afr Health Sci. 2022 Dec;22(4):348-356. doi: 10.4314/ahs.v22i4.40. Afr Health Sci. 2022. PMID: 37092103 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous