COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF MATERNAL AND PERINATAL OUTCOMES FOLLOWING DIFFERENT METHODS OF LABOUR INDUCTION IN TERM PREGNANCIES: A PROSPECTIVE OBSERVATIONAL STUDY FROM A TERTIARY CARE CENTER IN NORTH INDIA
Main Article Content
Keywords
Labour induction, Misoprostol, Dinoprostone, Foley catheter, Maternal outcomes, Perinatal outcomes
Abstract
Background: Induction of labour is a common obstetric intervention aimed at improving maternal and perinatal outcomes when continuation of pregnancy poses risks. Various pharmacological and mechanical methods are used, each with differing efficacy and safety profiles.
Objectives: To comparatively evaluate the maternal and perinatal outcomes associated with different methods of labour induction in term pregnancies.
Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital in North India from January 2013 to September 2013, including 188 term pregnant women undergoing induction of labour. Participants were grouped based on the induction method used: misoprostol (n=78), dinoprostone (n=60), and Foley catheter (n=50). Maternal outcomes (induction-to-delivery interval, mode of delivery, complications) and perinatal outcomes (birth weight, Apgar score, NICU admission) were compared. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 25.0, with p<0.05 considered significant.
Results: Baseline characteristics were comparable across groups. The mean induction-to-delivery interval was significantly shorter in the misoprostol group compared to dinoprostone and Foley catheter groups (p<0.001). Vaginal delivery rates were highest with misoprostol (71.8%) but did not differ significantly across groups. Cesarean section rates were higher in the Foley catheter group, though not statistically significant. Maternal complications, including uterine hyperstimulation and postpartum hemorrhage, were comparable. Perinatal outcomes, including Apgar scores and NICU admissions, showed no significant differences among groups.
Conclusion: All three methods of labour induction demonstrated comparable maternal and perinatal outcomes. Misoprostol was associated with a shorter induction-to-delivery interval, making it an efficient option. Selection of induction method should be individualized based on clinical context and resource availability.
References
2. Vogel JP, Souza JP, Gülmezoglu AM. Patterns and outcomes of induction of labour in Africa and Asia: a secondary analysis of the WHO global survey on maternal and neonatal health. PloS one. 2013 Jun 3;8(6):e65612.
3. World Health Organization. WHO recommendations for induction of labour. Geneva: WHO; 2011.
4. Government of India. India Newborn Action Plan (INAP). Ministry of Health and Family Welfare.
5. Ten Eikelder ML, Neervoort F, Rengerink KO, Jozwiak M, De Leeuw JW, De Graaf I, van Pampus MG, Franssen M, Oudijk M, van der Salm P, Woiski M. Induction of labour with a Foley catheter or oral misoprostol at term: the PROBAAT-II study, a multicentre randomised controlled trial. BMC pregnancy and childbirth. 2013 Mar 19;13(1):67.
6. Hofmeyr GJ, Gülmezoglu AM, Pileggi C, Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group. Vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 1996 Sep 1;2013(1).
7. Jozwiak M, Oude Rengerink K, Benthem M, et al. Foley catheter versus vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel for induction of labour at term (PROBAAT trial): an open-label, randomised controlled trial. The Lancet. 2011 Dec 17;378(9809):2095-103.
8. Alfirevic Z, Kelly AJ, Dowswell T. Intravenous oxytocin alone for cervical ripening and induction of labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2009(4).
9. National Health Mission. Guidelines for antenatal care and skilled attendance at birth by ANMs/LHVs/SNs. Government of India; 2010.
10. Jozwiak M, Oude Rengerink K, Benthem M, et al. Foley catheter versus vaginal prostaglandin E2 gel for induction of labour at term (PROBAAT trial): an open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2011 Dec 17;378(9809):2095-103.
11. Wing DA, Brown R, Plante LA, Miller H, Rugarn O, Powers BL. Misoprostol vaginal insert and time to vaginal delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2013 Aug 1;122(2 PART 1):201-9.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All articles published in JPTCP are licensed under Copyright Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
