Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Induction of labour for improving birth outcomes for women at or beyond term

Esta versión no es la más reciente

Abstract

Background

As a pregnancy continues beyond term the risks of babies dying inside the womb or in the immediate newborn period increase. Whether a policy of labour induction at a predetermined gestational age can reduce this increased risk is the subject of this review.

Objectives

To evaluate the benefits and harms of a policy of labour induction at term or post‐term compared to awaiting spontaneous labour or later induction of labour.

Search methods

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (June 2006). We updated this search on 14 July 2009 and added the results to the awaiting classification section.

Selection criteria

Randomized controlled trials conducted in women at or beyond term. The eligible trials were those comparing a policy of labour induction to a policy of awaiting spontaneous onset of labour. Trials comparing cervical ripening methods, membrane stripping/sweeping or nipple stimulation without any commitment to delivery within a certain time were excluded.

Data collection and analysis

Two review authors independently evaluated potentially eligible trials and extracted data. Outcomes are analysed in two main categories: gestational age and cervix status.

Main results

We included 19 trials reporting on 7984 women. A policy of labour induction at 41 completed weeks or beyond was associated with fewer (all‐cause) perinatal deaths (1/2986 versus 9/2953; relative risk (RR) 0.30; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 to 0.99). The risk difference is 0.00 (95% CI 0.01 to 0.00). If deaths due to congenital abnormality are excluded, no deaths remain in the labour induction group and seven deaths remain in the no‐induction group. There was no evidence of a statistically significant difference in the risk of caesarean section (RR 0.92; 95% CI 0.76 to 1.12; RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.31) for women induced at 41 and 42 completed weeks respectively. Women induced at 37 to 40 completed weeks were less likely to have a caesarean section than those in the expectant management group (RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.99). There were fewer babies with meconium aspiration syndrome (41+: RR 0.29; 95% CI 0.12 to 0.68, four trials, 1325 women; 42+: RR 0.66; 95% CI 0.24 to 1.81, two trials, 388 women).

Authors' conclusions

A policy of labour induction after 41 completed weeks or later compared to awaiting spontaneous labour either indefinitely or at least one week is associated with fewer perinatal deaths. However, the absolute risk is extremely small. Women should be appropriately counselled on both the relative and absolute risks.

[Note: The 10 citations in the awaiting classification section of the review may alter the conclusions of the review once assessed.]

PICO

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

El uso y la enseñanza del modelo PICO están muy extendidos en el ámbito de la atención sanitaria basada en la evidencia para formular preguntas y estrategias de búsqueda y para caracterizar estudios o metanálisis clínicos. PICO son las siglas en inglés de cuatro posibles componentes de una pregunta de investigación: paciente, población o problema; intervención; comparación; desenlace (outcome).

Para saber más sobre el uso del modelo PICO, puede consultar el Manual Cochrane.

Plain language summary

Induction of labour in normal pregnancies at or beyond term

A normal pregnancy lasts about 40 weeks from the start of the woman's last menstrual period, but anything from 37 to 42 weeks is considered within the normal range. Births before 37 weeks are considered premature because these babies often have breathing difficulties and other problems as some of their organs will not yet be fully matured, e.g. their livers. Births after 42 weeks seem to carry a slightly increased risk for the baby, and this review sought to find out if induction of labour at a prespecified time could reduce this increased risk or not. There are currently no tests that can tell if a baby would be better to be left in the womb or be induced and born, so arbitrary time limits have been suggested. The review of trials found 19 studies involving almost 8000 women given induction of labour at various times from 38 weeks to over 42 weeks' gestation; some were quite old trials and the quality was variable. The review grouped the trials by induction at (1) 37 to 40 weeks; (2) 41 completed weeks; and (3) 42 completed weeks, compared with waiting to a later date. There were fewer baby deaths when a labour induction policy was implemented after 41 completed weeks or later. However, such deaths were rare with either policy. Women's experiences and opinions about these choices have not been adequately evaluated.