Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38046528›Full record

ArticleGeburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde2023

Induction of Labour with a Double Balloon Catheter - Comparison of Effectiveness of Six Versus Twelve Hours Insertion Time: a Prospective Case Control Study.

Lena Strößner, Yvonne Heimann, Ekkehard Schleußner, Anna Kolterer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde, 2023. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

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

4 authors.

Lena StrößnerDepartment of Obstetrics, University Hospital Jena, Jena, Germany.
Yvonne HeimannDepartment of Obstetrics, University Hospital Jena, Jena, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7591-2045
Ekkehard SchleußnerDepartment of Obstetrics, University Hospital Jena, Jena, Germany.
Anna KoltererDepartment of Obstetrics, University Hospital Jena, Jena, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Induction of labour is a common obstetric procedure to initiate or augment contractions when labour is delayed or uncertain. The double balloon catheter is a safe and effective mechanical method for cervical ripening during induction of labour. This study evaluates the effectiveness of reducing double balloon catheter insertion time from 12 to 6 hours. Methods: 248 women undergoing induction with a double balloon catheter at term were divided into two groups: catheter placed for 12 hours at 8 pm in the first half of 2021 (P12) and catheter placed for 6 hours at 7 am in the second half of 2021 (P6). T-tests, chi-squared tests, and Wilcoxon signed rank test were used for statistical analysis. Primary and secondary endpoints included induction to delivery interval, prostaglandin to delivery interval, mode of delivery, and maternal and neonatal outcomes. Results: The P6 group had a significantly reduced induction to delivery interval of 558 min (P6: 1348 min, P12: 1906 min, p < 0.01, 95% CI: 376-710) within demographically comparable groups. Multiparous women also showed a significant reduction in prostaglandin to delivery interval of 260 min (P6: 590 min, P12: 850 min, p = 0.038, 95% CI: 9-299). There were no significant differences in mode of delivery, maternal blood loss, or neonatal outcome. Conclusion: Reducing double balloon catheter placement time from 12 to 6 hours resulted in almost 9 hours less induction to delivery interval without adverse effects on maternal and neonatal outcome.

Indexed as

cervical ripeningcervical ripening balloondouble-balloon catheterinduction of labourtime to delivery

Identifiers

PMID38046528
PMCPMC10689105

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.