ArticleEClinicalMedicine2024
Outpatient elective induction of labour at 39 weeks' gestation (HOME INDUCTION): an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase III, non-inferiority trial.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Effectiveness, Safety, and Cost-Effectiveness of Labour Induction Methods: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2025Review
- Perinatal mortality and other severe adverse outcomes following planned birth at 39 weeks versus expectant management in low-risk women: a population based cohort study.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The increased demand for induction of labour (IOL) at 39 weeks' gestation in normal-risk nulliparous patients creates significant logistical challenges for busy maternity units. A potential innovation is commencing induction by means of outpatient cervical ripening, using either a vaginal prostaglandin preparation (Propess) or an osmotic cervical dilator (Dilapan-S). Methods: A Phase III, open label, single centre non-inferiority trial (EudraCT number 2019-004697-25) randomised healthy nulliparous women who chose elective IOL at 39 weeks to one of three methods of initial cervical ripening, specifically 12 h of Dilapan-S(D12), 24 h of Dilapan-S(D24), or 24 h of Propess(P24) between November 2020 and July 2023. After initial administration of the IOL agent in the hospital, participants returned home for 12 or 24 h, before readmission to complete delivery. The primary outcome was vaginal delivery achieved at any time, and this was compared in a non-inferiority analysis of Dilapan-S compared to Propess, within a 10% non-inferiority margin. Secondary outcomes included pairwise comparisons for each induction agent, and a range of logistical factors, such as time to delivery, the need for an additional cervical ripening agent, and length of hospital stay. Findings: Of the 327 women randomised at 38 weeks, 271 (83%) completed the induction intervention. The D24 and P24 groups showed similarly high rates of vaginal delivery, 75% and 76% respectively. D12 had a lower vaginal delivery rate of 64% and consequently the overall comparison of Dilapan-S to Propess did not demonstrate non-inferiority (difference = -6%, 95% CI = -17%, 5%) because the lower 95% CI exceeded the -10% threshold of non-inferiority. The majority of participants across all groups were delivered by any means within 72 h of starting the induction process, inclusive of time spent at home (89% of the D24 group, 98% of the D12 group, 95% of the P24 group). There were no differences in rates of adverse events between groups. Interpretation: There were similarly high vaginal delivery rates for D24 and P24, with at least 75% of patients successfully delivering vaginally following outpatient cervical ripening, with no significant adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes. Funding: The Rotunda Foundation, Medicem Technology s.r.o.
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.