Comparison of Labor Curves Between Spontaneous and Induced Labor.
Journal
Obstetrics and gynecology
ISSN: 1873-233X
Titre abrégé: Obstet Gynecol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0401101
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Dec 2023
01 Dec 2023
Historique:
received:
10
06
2023
accepted:
17
08
2023
medline:
20
11
2023
pubmed:
12
10
2023
entrez:
12
10
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To compare the labor curve between individuals with induced labor and those undergoing spontaneous labor. This was a secondary analysis of the Consortium on Safe Labor database, including nulliparous and multiparous individuals with singleton vertex pregnancy who delivered vaginally after spontaneous labor or induction of labor at term. Labor that resulted in uterine rupture and neonates with a 5-minute Apgar scores less than 7, birth injury, or neonatal intensive care unit admission was excluded. We modeled the course of cervical dilation using repeated-measures analysis with a polynomial function. We compared traverse time , defined as the elapsed time between two given dilation measures, between induced and spontaneous labor using interval-censored regression. Of 46,835 nulliparous individuals, 18,576 and 28,259 underwent induced and spontaneous labor, respectively. Of 77,503 multiparous individuals, 29,684 and 47,819 underwent induced and spontaneous labor, respectively. The start of the active phase on the labor curve was 6 cm in induced labor, regardless of parity. In nulliparous individuals, induced labor compared with spontaneous labor had a significantly shorter traverse time from 6 to 10 cm (median 1.8 hours [5th-95th percentile 0.4-8.6 hours] vs 2.3 hours [5th-95th percentile 0.6-9.4 hours]; P <.01). In multiparous individuals, induced labor compared with spontaneous labor had a significantly shorter traverse time from 6 to 10 cm (median 0.9 hours [5th-95th percentile 0.1-6.0 hours] vs 1.4 hours [5th-95th percentile 0.3-7.9 hours]; P <.01). Similar to spontaneous labor, the start of the active phase of induced labor was at 6 cm of dilation. Comparatively, induced labor had a shorter active phase than spontaneous labor. These findings suggest that the current criteria for active phase arrest provided by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists do not need to be lengthened for individuals in induced labor.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37826850
doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000005407
pii: 00006250-990000000-00927
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1416-1422Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Financial Disclosure The authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest.
Références
Friedman EA. Primigravid labor; a graphicostatistical analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1955;6:567–89. doi: 10.1097/00006250-195512000-00001
doi: 10.1097/00006250-195512000-00001
Friedman E. The graphic analysis of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1954;68:1568–75. doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(54)90311-7
doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(54)90311-7
Zhang J, Landy HJ, Ware Branch D, Burkman R, Haberman S, Gregory KD, et al. Contemporary patterns of spontaneous labor with normal neonatal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol 2010;116:1281–7. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181fdef6e
doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181fdef6e
Caughey AB, Cahill AG, Guise JM, Rouse DJ. Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014;210:179–93. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.01.026
doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.01.026
Gilroy LC, Al-Kouatly HB, Minkoff HL, McLaren RA Jr. Changes in obstetrical practices and pregnancy outcomes following the ARRIVE trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2022;226:716.e1–12. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.02.003
doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.02.003
Østborg TB, Romundstad PR, Eggebø TM. Duration of the active phase of labor in spontaneous and induced labors. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2017;96:120–7. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13039
doi: 10.1111/aogs.13039
Zhang J, Troendle J, Reddy UM, Laughon SK, Branch DW, Burkman R, et al. Contemporary cesarean delivery practice in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;203:326.e1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.06.058
doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2010.06.058
Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Sutton PD, Ventura SJ, Mathews TJ, Osterman MJ. Births: final data for 2008. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2010;59:1, 3–71.
Zaki MN, Hibbard JU, Kominiarek MA. Contemporary labor patterns and maternal age. Obstet Gynecol 2013;122:1018–24. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182a9c92c
doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182a9c92c
Kominiarek MA, Zhang J, Vanveldhuisen P, Troendle J, Beaver J, Hibbard JU. Contemporary labor patterns: the impact of maternal body mass index. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2011;205:244.e1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2011.06.014
doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2011.06.014
Harper LM, Caughey AB, Odibo AO, Roehl KA, Zhao Q, Cahill AG. Normal progress of induced labor. Obstet Gynecol 2012;119:1113–8. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e318253d7aa
doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e318253d7aa
Bregand-White JM, Kominiarek MA, Hibbard JU. Hypertension and patterns of induced labor at term. Pregnancy Hypertens 2017;10:57–63. doi: 10.1016/j.preghy.2017.06.003
doi: 10.1016/j.preghy.2017.06.003
Alexander JM, Sharma SK, McIntire DD, Leveno KJ. Epidural analgesia lengthens the Friedman active phase of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2002;100:46–50. doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(02)02009-4
doi: 10.1016/s0029-7844(02)02009-4
Laughon SK, Zhang J, Troendle J, Sun L, Reddy UM. Using a simplified Bishop score to predict vaginal delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2011;117:805–11. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182114ad2
doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182114ad2
Nethery E, Levy B, McLean K, Sitcov K, Souter VL. Effects of the ARRIVE (A Randomized Trial of Induction Versus Expectant Management) trial on elective induction and obstetric outcomes in term nulliparous patients. Obstet Gynecol 2023;142:242–50. doi: 10.1097/aog.0000000000005217
doi: 10.1097/aog.0000000000005217