Trial reportPloS one2023
Early versus late amniotomy during induction of labor using oxytocin: A randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Definitions of failed induction of labor in the literature: a systematic review.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Pooled it
- Early versus late amniotomy during twin labor.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Article
- An Appraisal of Labor Augmentation: An Update on Current Evidence and Practice.Maternal-fetal medicine (Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.) · 2026Review
- Artificial Rupture of Membranes and Spontaneous Rupture of Membranes: A Systematic Review of Feto-Maternal Outcomes.Cureus · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the effect of early amniotomy on labor duration, maternal and neonatal outcomes during induction of labor (IOL).
methodsThis was a randomized controlled trial, conducted over a period of eight months at a monocentric site. Singleton pregnancies in nulliparous and parous patients with cephalic presentation and Bishop score ≥ 6 were enrolled in the study. One hundred participants were randomized into two groups: early amniotomy (initiating IOL with amniotomy followed by oxytocin) versus late amniotomy (initiating IOL with oxytocin followed by amniotomy 4 hours later). The primary endpoint was the time to active phase (cervical dilation ≥ 5 cm) during IOL. Secondary outcomes were time to vaginal delivery, mode of delivery, and maternal and fetal outcomes.
resultsEarly amniotomy reduced time to active phase by 2 hours and 46 minutes compared to the late amniotomy group (3 h 42 min vs. 6 h 28 min; p<0.0001). It also reduced time to vaginal delivery by 2 hours and 52 minutes (5 h 17 min vs. 8 h 9 min; p = 0.0003). The rate of cesarean section (CS) for failed IOL was significantly lower in the early amniotomy group (31.2% vs. 70.0%; p = 0.02), without any significant difference in the overall rate of cesarean section between the two groups (32.0% vs. 40.8%; p = 0.36). There was no significant difference in maternal or fetal outcomes.
conclusionsEarly amniotomy in IOL significantly shortens the time to active phase as well as the overall duration of labor without compromising maternal and neonatal safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.