Dataset Information

Elective induction of labour and expectant management in late-term pregnancy: A prospective cohort study alongside the INDEX randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To assess adverse perinatal outcomes and caesarean section of low-risk women receiving elective induction of labour at 41 weeks or expectant management until 42 weeks according to their preferred and actual management strategy.

Design

Multicentre prospective cohort study alongside RCT.

Setting

90 midwifery practices and 12 hospitals in the Netherlands.

Population

3642 low-risk women with uncomplicated singleton late-term pregnancy.

Main outcome measures

Composite adverse outcome (perinatal death, Apgar score 5' < 7, NICU admission, meconium aspiration syndrome), composite severe adverse perinatal outcome (all above with Apgar score 5' < 4 instead of < 7) and caesarean section.

Results

From 2012-2016, 3642 women out of 6088 eligible women for the INDEX RCT, participated in the cohort study for observational data collection (induction of labour n = 372; expectant management n = 2174; unknown preference/management strategy n = 1096).Adverse perinatal outcome occurred in 1.1 % (4/372) in the induction group versus 1.9 % (42/2174) in the expectant group (adjRR 0.56; 95 %CI: 0.17-1.79), with severe adverse perinatal outcome occurring in 0.3 % (1/372) versus 1.0 % (22/2174), respectively (adjRR 0.39; 95 % CI: 0.05-2.88). There were no stillbirths among all 3642 women; one neonatal death occurred in the unknown preference/management group. Caesarean section rates were 10.5 % (39/372) after induction and 8.9 % (193/2174) after expectant management (adjRR 1.32; 95 % CI: 0.95-1.84).A higher incidence of adverse perinatal outcome was observed in nulliparous compared to multiparous women. Nulliparous 1.8 % (3/170) in the induction group versus 2.6 % (30/1134) in the expectant management group (adjRR 0.58; 95 % CI 0.14-2.41), multiparous 0.5 % (1/201) versus 1.1 % (11/1039) (adjRR 0.54; 95 % CI 0.07-24.19). One maternal death due to amniotic fluid embolism occurred after elective induction at 41 weeks + 6 days.

Conclusion

In this cohort study among low-risk women receiving the policy of their preference in late-term pregnancy, a non-significant difference was found between induction of labour at 41 weeks and expectant management until 42 weeks in absolute risks of composite adverse (1.1 % versus 1.9 %) and severe adverse (0.3 % versus 1.0 %) perinatal outcome. The risks in this cohort study were lower than in the trial setting. There were no stillbirths among all 3642 women. Caesarean section rates were comparable.

SUBMITTER: Bruinsma A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9574420 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Elective induction of labour and expectant management in late-term pregnancy: A prospective cohort study alongside the INDEX randomised controlled trial.

Bruinsma Aafke A Keulen Judit Kj JK Kortekaas Joep C JC van Dillen Jeroen J Duijnhoven Ruben G RG Bossuyt Patrick Mm PM van Kaam Anton H AH van der Post Joris Am JA Mol Ben W BW de Miranda Esteriek E

European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X 20221003

<h4>Objective</h4>To assess adverse perinatal outcomes and caesarean section of low-risk women receiving elective induction of labour at 41 weeks or expectant management until 42 weeks according to their preferred and actual management strategy.<h4>Design</h4>Multicentre prospective cohort study alongside RCT.<h4>Setting</h4>90 midwifery practices and 12 hospitals in the Netherlands.<h4>Population</h4>3642 low-risk women with uncomplicated singleton late-term pregnancy.<h4>Main outcome measures< ...[more]

PMID: 36262791

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine neonatal outcomes (perinatal mortality and special care unit admission) and maternal outcomes (mode of delivery, delivery complications) of elective induction of labour compared with expectant management.DesignRetrospective cohort study using an unselected population database.SettingConsultant and midwife led obstetric units in Scotland 1981-2007.Participants1,271,549 women with singleton pregnancies of 37 weeks or more gestation.InterventionsOutcomes of elective induction of labour (induction of labour with no recognised medical indication) at 37, 38, 39, 40, and 41 weeks' gestation compared with those of expectant management (continuation of pregnancy to either spontaneous labour, induction of labour or caesarean section at a later gestation).Main outcome measuresExtended perinatal mortality, mode of delivery, postpartum haemorrhage, obstetric anal sphincter injury, and admission to a neonatal or special care baby unit. Outcomes were adjusted for age at delivery, parity, year of birth, birth weight, deprivation category, and, where appropriate, mode of delivery.ResultsAt each gestation between 37 and 41 completed weeks, elective induction of labour was associated with a decreased odds of perinatal mortality compared with expectant management (at 40 weeks' gestation 0.08% (37/44,764) in the induction of labour group versus 0.18% (627/350,643) in the expectant management group; adjusted odds ratio 0.39, 99% confidence interval 0.24 to 0.63), without a reduction in the odds of spontaneous vertex delivery (at 40 weeks' gestation 79.9% (35,775/44,778) in the induction of labour group versus 73.7% (258,665/350,791) in the expectant management group; adjusted odds ratio 1.26, 1.22 to 1.31). Admission to a neonatal unit was, however, increased in association with elective induction of labour at all gestations before 41 weeks (at 40 weeks' gestation 8.0% (3605/44,778) in the induction of labour group compared with 7.3% (25,572/350,791) in the expectant management group; adjusted odds ratio 1.14, 1.09 to 1.20).ConclusionAlthough residual confounding may remain, our findings indicate that elective induction of labour at term gestation can reduce perinatal mortality in developed countries without increasing the risk of operative delivery.

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare induction of labour at 41 weeks with expectant management until 42 weeks in low risk women.DesignOpen label, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.Setting123 primary care midwifery practices and 45 hospitals (secondary care) in the Netherlands, 2012-16.Participants1801 low risk women with an uncomplicated singleton pregnancy: randomised to induction (n=900) or to expectant management until 42 weeks (n=901).InterventionsInduction at 41 weeks or expectant management until 42 weeks with induction if necessary.Primary outcome measuresPrimary outcome was a composite of perinatal mortality and neonatal morbidity (Apgar score <7 at five minutes, arterial pH <7.05, meconium aspiration syndrome, plexus brachialis injury, intracranial haemorrhage, and admission to a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Secondary outcomes included maternal outcomes and mode of delivery. The null hypothesis that expectant management is inferior to induction was tested with a non-inferiority margin of 2%.ResultsMedian gestational age at delivery was 41 weeks+0 days (interquartile range 41 weeks+0 days-41 weeks+1 day) for the induction group and 41 weeks+2 days (41 weeks+0 days-41 weeks+5 days) for the expectant management group. The primary outcome was analysed for both the intention-to-treat population and the per protocol population. In the induction group, 15/900 (1.7%) women had an adverse perinatal outcome versus 28/901 (3.1%) in the expectant management group (absolute risk difference -1.4%, 95% confidence interval -2.9% to 0.0%, P=0.22 for non-inferiority). 11 (1.2%) infants in the induction group and 23 (2.6%) in the expectant management group had an Apgar score <7 at five minutes (relative risk (RR) 0.48, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.98). No infants in the induction group and three (0.3%) in the expectant management group had an Apgar score <4 at five minutes. One fetal death (0.1%) occurred in the induction group and two (0.2%) in the expectant management group. No neonatal deaths occurred. 3 (0.3%) neonates in the induction group versus 8 (0.9%) in the expectant management group were admitted to an NICU (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.41). No significant difference was found in composite adverse maternal outcomes (induction n=122 (13.6%) v expectant management n=102 (11.3%)) or in caesarean section rate (both groups n=97 (10.8%)).ConclusionsThis study could not show non-inferiority of expectant management compared with induction of labour in women with uncomplicated pregnancies at 41 weeks; instead a significant difference of 1.4% was found for risk of adverse perinatal outcomes in favour of induction, although the chances of a good perinatal outcome were high with both strategies and the incidence of perinatal mortality, Apgar score <4 at five minutes, and NICU admission low.Trial registrationNetherlands Trial Register NTR3431.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate if induction of labour at 41 weeks improves perinatal and maternal outcomes in women with a low risk pregnancy compared with expectant management and induction of labour at 42 weeks.DesignMulticentre, open label, randomised controlled superiority trial.Setting14 hospitals in Sweden, 2016-18.Participants2760 women with a low risk uncomplicated singleton pregnancy randomised (1:1) by the Swedish Pregnancy Register. 1381 women were assigned to the induction group and 1379 were assigned to the expectant management group.InterventionsInduction of labour at 41 weeks and expectant management and induction of labour at 42 weeks.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was a composite perinatal outcome including one or more of stillbirth, neonatal mortality, Apgar score less than 7 at five minutes, pH less than 7.00 or metabolic acidosis (pH <7.05 and base deficit >12 mmol/L) in the umbilical artery, hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy, intracranial haemorrhage, convulsions, meconium aspiration syndrome, mechanical ventilation within 72 hours, or obstetric brachial plexus injury. Primary analysis was by intention to treat.ResultsThe study was stopped early owing to a significantly higher rate of perinatal mortality in the expectant management group. The composite primary perinatal outcome did not differ between the groups: 2.4% (33/1381) in the induction group and 2.2% (31/1379) in the expectant management group (relative risk 1.06, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.73; P=0.90). No perinatal deaths occurred in the induction group but six (five stillbirths and one early neonatal death) occurred in the expectant management group (P=0.03). The proportion of caesarean delivery, instrumental vaginal delivery, or any major maternal morbidity did not differ between the groups.ConclusionsThis study comparing induction of labour at 41 weeks with expectant management and induction at 42 weeks does not show any significant difference in the primary composite adverse perinatal outcome. However, a reduction of the secondary outcome perinatal mortality is observed without increasing adverse maternal outcomes. Although these results should be interpreted cautiously, induction of labour ought to be offered to women no later than at 41 weeks and could be one (of few) interventions that reduces the rate of stillbirths.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN26113652.

Project description:BackgroundGestational diabetes (GDM) is one of the most common complications of pregnancies affecting around 7% of women. This clinical condition is associated with an increased risk of developing fetal macrosomia and is related to a higher incidence of caesarean section in comparison to the general population. Strong evidence indicating the best management between induction of labour at term and expectant monitoring are missing.Methods/designPregnant women with singleton pregnancy in vertex presentation previously diagnosed with gestational diabetes will be asked to participate in a multicenter open-label randomized controlled trial between 38+0 and 39+0 gestational weeks. Women will be recruited in the third trimester in the outpatient clinic or in the Day Assessment Unit according to local protocols. Women who opt to take part will be randomized according to induction of labour or expectant management for spontaneous delivery. Patients allocated to the induction group will be admitted to the obstetric ward and offered induction of labour via use of prostaglandins, Foley catheter or oxytocin (depending on clinical conditions). Women assigned to the expectant arm will be sent to their domicile where they will be followed up until delivery, through maternal and fetal wellbeing monitoring twice weekly. The primary study outcome is the Caesarean section (C-section) rate, whilst secondary measurements are maternal and neonatal outcomes. A total sample of 1760 women (880 each arm) will be recruited to identify a relative difference between the two arms equal to 20% in favour of induction, with concerns to C-section rate. Data will be collected until mothers and newborns discharge from the hospital. Analysis of the outcome measures will be carried out by intention to treat.DiscussionThe present trial will provide evidence as to whether or not, in women affected by gestational diabetes, induction of labour between 38+0 and 39+0 weeks is an effective management to ameliorate maternal and neonatal outcomes. The primary objective is to determine whether caesarean section rate could be reduced among women undergoing induction of labour, in comparison to patients allocated to expectant monitoring. The secondary objective consists of the assessment and comparison of maternal and neonatal outcomes in the two study arms. .

Project description:BackgroundThe increased demand for induction of labour (IOL) at 39 weeks' gestation in normal-risk nulliparous patients creates significant logistical challenges for busy maternity units. A potential innovation is commencing induction by means of outpatient cervical ripening, using either a vaginal prostaglandin preparation (Propess) or an osmotic cervical dilator (Dilapan-S).MethodsA Phase III, open label, single centre non-inferiority trial (EudraCT number 2019-004697-25) randomised healthy nulliparous women who chose elective IOL at 39 weeks to one of three methods of initial cervical ripening, specifically 12 h of Dilapan-S(D12), 24 h of Dilapan-S(D24), or 24 h of Propess(P24) between November 2020 and July 2023. After initial administration of the IOL agent in the hospital, participants returned home for 12 or 24 h, before readmission to complete delivery. The primary outcome was vaginal delivery achieved at any time, and this was compared in a non-inferiority analysis of Dilapan-S compared to Propess, within a 10% non-inferiority margin. Secondary outcomes included pairwise comparisons for each induction agent, and a range of logistical factors, such as time to delivery, the need for an additional cervical ripening agent, and length of hospital stay.FindingsOf the 327 women randomised at 38 weeks, 271 (83%) completed the induction intervention. The D24 and P24 groups showed similarly high rates of vaginal delivery, 75% and 76% respectively. D12 had a lower vaginal delivery rate of 64% and consequently the overall comparison of Dilapan-S to Propess did not demonstrate non-inferiority (difference = -6%, 95% CI = -17%, 5%) because the lower 95% CI exceeded the -10% threshold of non-inferiority. The majority of participants across all groups were delivered by any means within 72 h of starting the induction process, inclusive of time spent at home (89% of the D24 group, 98% of the D12 group, 95% of the P24 group). There were no differences in rates of adverse events between groups.InterpretationThere were similarly high vaginal delivery rates for D24 and P24, with at least 75% of patients successfully delivering vaginally following outpatient cervical ripening, with no significant adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes.FundingThe Rotunda Foundation, Medicem Technology s.r.o.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the cost-effectiveness of elective induction of labour (IOL) at 41 weeks and expectant management (EM) until 42 weeks.DesignCost-effectiveness analysis from a healthcare perspective alongside a randomised controlled trial (INDEX).Setting123 primary care midwifery practices and 45 obstetric departments of hospitals in the Netherlands.PopulationWe studied 1801 low-risk women with late-term pregnancy, randomised to IOL at 41 weeks (N = 900) or EM until 42 weeks (N = 901).MethodsThe incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was expressed as the ratio of the difference in costs and the difference in main perinatal outcomes. A Cost-Effectiveness Acceptability Curve (CEAC) was constructed to assess whether induction is cost-effective for a range of monetary values as thresholds. We performed subgroup analysis for parity.Main outcome measuresDirect medical costs, composite adverse perinatal outcome (CAPO) (perinatal mortality, NICU admission, Apgar 5 min < 7, plexus brachialis injury and/or meconium aspiration syndrome) and composite severe adverse perinatal outcome (SAPO) (including Apgar 5 min < 4 instead of < 7).ResultsThe average costs were €3858 in the induction group and €3723 in the expectant group (mean difference €135; 95 % CI -235 to 493). The ICERs of IOL compared to EM to prevent one additional CAPO and SAPO was €9436 and €14,994, respectively. The CEAC showed a 80 % chance of IOL being cost-effective with a willingness-to-pay of €22,000 for prevention of one CAPO and €50,000 for one SAPO. Subgroup analysis showed a willingness-to-pay to prevent one CAPO for nulliparous of €47,000 and for multiparous €190,000. To prevent one SAPO the willingness-to-pay is €62,000 for nulliparous and €970,000 for multiparous women.ConclusionsInduction at 41 weeks has an 80 % chance of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay of €22,000 for prevention of one CAPO and €50,000 for prevention of one SAPO. Subgroup analysis suggests that induction could be cost-effective for nulliparous women while it is unlikely cost-effective for multiparous women.Cost-effectiveness in other settings will depend on baseline characteristics of the population and health system organisation and funding.

Dataset Information

Elective induction of labour and expectant management in late-term pregnancy: A prospective cohort study alongside the INDEX randomised controlled trial.

Objective

Design

Setting

Population

Main outcome measures

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Elective induction of labour and expectant management in late-term pregnancy: A prospective cohort study alongside the INDEX randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets