ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2025
Safety and effectiveness of different modes of labor induction among pregnant women delivering at referral hospitals in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: a cohort study.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInduction of labor is a medical procedure used to stimulate uterine contractions and promote cervical ripening, facilitating spontaneous vaginal delivery (SVD). Various induction methods are used globally, but data on their safety and effectiveness, especially in developing countries, are limited. This study evaluated the safety and effectiveness of different labor induction methods among pregnant women delivering at referral hospitals in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.
methodsThis cohort study enrolled pregnant women who underwent labor induction at referral hospitals in Dar es Salaam from April to May 2021. The induction methods assessed were oxytocin, dinoprostone, misoprostol, and balloon catheter. Data were collected on the proportion of women achieving SVD, median time to delivery, and maternal and neonatal outcomes. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 23, presenting findings as frequencies, percentages, and medians. Cox regression modelling assessed factors associated with SVD and delivery outcomes.
resultsOf the 322 women included, 198 (61.5%) were at term, and 210 (65.2%) had comorbidities. Overall, 80% of women achieved SVD following induction. Among women induced with oxytocin, 95% achieved SVD, compared to 69% for dinoprostone, 72% for misoprostol, and 77% for balloon catheter. The median time to SVD was 5.42 h (IQR: 4.50-6.00) for oxytocin, 13 h (IQR: 12.00-14.00) for dinoprostone, 8.5 h (IQR: 7.00-9.00) for misoprostol, and 9.0 h (IQR: 8.00-10.00) for the balloon catheter. Maternal blood loss was significantly lower for oxytocin-induced women (p < 0.001), compared to misoprostol, dinoprostone, and balloon catheter. Neonatal outcomes were better for oxytocin-induced women (p < 0.01) and poorer for those induced with misoprostol (p < 0.01). Factors associated with achieving SVD included multigravidity (AoR = 1.57, p = 0.004), comorbidities (AoR = 1.47, p = 0.007), and use of oxytocin (AoR = 3.13, p < 0.001) or dinoprostone (AoR = 0.58, p = 0.003).
conclusionOxytocin was the most effective and safest method for labor induction within 24 h, resulting in favorable maternal and neonatal outcomes. Healthcare workers should prioritize oxytocin for timely deliveries, while considering alternatives like dinoprostone, misoprostol, and balloon catheter based on individual patient needs and clinical circumstances.
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.