Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35517716›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X2022

Term induction of labour in nulliparous women: When to draw the line?

Jill M Mitchell, Patrick Dicker, Grace Madigan, Sarah Nicholson, Suzanne Smyth, Fionnuala M Breathnach

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 49% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jill M MitchellRotunda Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Patrick DickerRoyal College of Surgeons, Dublin, Ireland.
Grace MadiganRotunda Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Sarah NicholsonRotunda Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Suzanne SmythRotunda Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Fionnuala M BreathnachRotunda Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Rotunda Hospital · IERoyal College of Surgeons in Ireland · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: There exists uncertainty surrounding the most effective and efficient means of inducing labour, particularly in the setting of an unfavourable cervix. This study aims to determine the merit of repeating dinoprostone administration when a single application has failed to render the cervix favourable for amniotomy. Study design: Retrospective analysis of a consecutive cohort of nulliparous women who underwent term induction of labour in a tertiary referral centre in Ireland was conducted over a 12- month period (December 2019 to January 2021). The time-interval from dinoprostone administration to delivery and the incidence of complicated birth, associated with single and sequential dinoprostone dosing, were determined. Comparisons were made using the Chi-square test and logistic regression adjusting for gestational age delivery. Results: 586 nulliparous women underwent term induction of labour during the study period. Administration of a single dose of dinoprostone or amniotomy alone were associated with the greatest prospect of an uncomplicated vaginal birth when compared to sequential dinoprostone dosing. Nonetheless, just one in four nulliparous women undergoing induction of labour experienced an unassisted and uncomplicated vaginal birth. The median [interquartile range] for time interval from induction to delivery or decision for caesarean delivery was 0.4 [0.3-0.6] days in those who underwent amniotomy alone, compared to 1.1 [0.7-1.5] days, 1.8 [1.4-2.2] days and 2.2 [2.0-2.6] days for those with 1, 2 or 3 doses of dinoprostone, respectively (p < 0.001 between all groups; Figure 1). Conclusion: These contemporaneous data indicate that in circumstances where more than a single dose of dinoprostone is required for cervical priming in a nulliparous woman, the incidence of an uncomplicated vaginal delivery decreased from more than half of women to less than one third. Over one third of women who were administered either a single dose of dinoprostone or more than one dose experienced an emergency intrapartum Caesarean delivery or a complicated vaginal birth. These findings are relevant to nulliparous women undergoing induction of labour in the setting of an unfavourable cervix and should be incorporated into shared decision-making consultations, particularly when repeat administration of dinoprostone is being considered.

Indexed as

Cervical ripeningDinoprostoneInduction of labourPerinatal outcomesProstaglandin

Identifiers

PMID35517716
PMCPMC9062658
OpenAlexW4226291011

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.