Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37649714›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X2023

Extended balloon labour induction: A single arm proof of concept trial.

Lorato Matshitsa, Nassali Mercy-Nkuba, G Justus Hofmeyr

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Achieving Equitable Access to Obstetric Devices Through Innovation, Improvisation and Off-Label Use.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025
    Review
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Lorato MatshitsaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Botswana, Pvt Bag, 00703 Gaborone, Botswana.
Nassali Mercy-NkubaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Botswana, Pvt Bag, 00703 Gaborone, Botswana.
G Justus HofmeyrDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Botswana, Pvt Bag, 00703 Gaborone, Botswana.
University of Botswana · BWUniversity of the Witwatersrand · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Mechanical labour induction with a transcervical balloon is as effective as pharmacological methods, with fewer adverse effects. Its use has been limited to labour induction with an unfavourable cervix able to retain the balloon. We have developed an innovative approach using 2-3 balloons side-by-side to extend the benefits of mechanical labour induction/augmentation with a favourable cervix without having to resort to amniotomy or uterotonics. Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of side-by-side balloons for extended labour induction/augmentation. Methods: We conducted a single arm proof of concept trial at Princess Marina Hospital (PMH) in Gaborone, Botswana. Participants were assessed as unsuitable for single balloon labour induction based on a modified Bishop cervical score of 7 or more. Three Foley catheters taped symmetrically side by side were passed through the cervix and inflated with 60mls each. Traction was applied with a weight of 250mls water suspended over the bed-end. The use of uterotonics, time from induction to birth, mode of birth, Apgar scores and adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes were recorded. Participants' satisfaction with the method of labour induction was assessed using a descriptive scale. Results: We enrolled 20 participants of whom two were nulliparous. Indications for labour induction were mainly late term (70%) and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (25%). The mean cervical score was 7.2. Overall, 17 (85%) of the participants achieved a vaginal birth, of whom 5 required oxytocin for labour augmentation. Four of these had requested removal of the balloons, one due to discomfort and three felt the process was taking too long. Three participants underwent caesarean birth. The mean time from initiation of labour induction to vaginal birth was 16 h (standard deviation (SD) 8.4) and 20 h for caesarean birth (SD 10.5). There were no 5-minute Apgar scores below 7 nor neonatal admissions. One baby required brief resuscitation. There were no adverse maternal outcomes. Conclusion: This proof-of-concept study suggests that use of side-by-side balloons in participants with favourable cervix is effective in achieving vaginal birth in most participants without uterotonics or amniotomy. There were no adverse outcomes, though the study was too small to exclude the possibility of rare adverse outcomes. This offers a novel option for labour induction/augmentation, particularly where uterotonics or amniotomy are best avoided such as prior caesarean birth, vertical infection transmission risk and in settings with limited capacity for fetal surveillance. The results clearly justify larger randomized trials to evaluate this novel approach with greater precision. On the basis of the current study we are developing a purpose-designed balloon for extended balloon labour induction.

Indexed as

Favourable cervixFoley catheter balloonLabour augmentationLabour induction

Identifiers

PMID37649714
PMCPMC10462842
OpenAlexW4385788666

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.