Clinical Impact of a Restrictive Labor Induction Approval Process

被引:1
作者
Tolcher, Mary Catherine [1 ]
Hokenstad, Alexis N. [2 ]
Weaver, Amy L. [3 ]
McGree, Michaela E. [3 ]
Rose, Carl H. [2 ]
Famuyide, Abimbola O. [2 ]
Brost, Brian C. [4 ]
机构
[1] Baylor Coll Med, Div Maternal Fetal Med, Houston, TX 77030 USA
[2] Mayo Clin, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Rochester, MN USA
[3] Mayo Clin, Div Biomed Stat & Informat, Dept Hlth Sci Res, Rochester, MN USA
[4] Wake Forest Sch Med, Div Maternal Fetal Med, Winston Salem, NC USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Induction of labor; Elective delivery; Nonmedically; indicated delivery; Cesarean delivery; INDICATED LATE-PRETERM; EXPECTANT MANAGEMENT; ELECTIVE INDUCTION; NULLIPAROUS WOMEN; RESPIRATORY MORBIDITY; QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; CESAREAN DELIVERY; TERM; GUIDELINES; PROGRAM;
D O I
10.1159/000491084
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Background/Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of a restrictive labor induction approval process on induction and primary cesarean delivery rates. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a tertiary care academic center from 2006 through 2012. The cohort of deliveries before (pre-intervention) and after (post-intervention) the process included term, singleton pregnancies with no contraindication to vaginal delivery. The primary outcome was induction of labor rates, subgrouped on the basis of whether it was medically or nonmedically indicated. Secondary outcomes included the primary cesarean rate and other maternal and neonatal outcomes. Results: Of 13,753 deliveries, 6,746 met study inclusion criteria. There was a significant decrease in induction rates comparing the pre- and post-intervention periods (21.0 vs. 18.5%, p = 0.01). Nonmedically indicated induction rates also decreased significantly (2.9 vs. 0.6%, p < 0.001). No difference was observed in medically indicated induction (18.1 vs. 17.9%, p = 0.84), the primary cesarean rate (14.4 vs. 15.8%, p = 0.12), or any of the measured neonatal outcomes (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Implementation of a labor induction approval process was associated with a significant reduction in overall and nonindicated induction rates but did not affect the primary cesarean rate or neonatal outcomes. (C) 2018 S. Karger AG, Basel
引用
收藏
页码:166 / 173
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Definition of Failed Induction of Labor and Its Predictive Factors: Two Unsolved Issues of an Everyday Clinical Situation
    Banos, Nuria
    Migliorelli, Federico
    Posadas, Eduardo
    Ferreri, Janisse
    Palacio, Montse
    FETAL DIAGNOSIS AND THERAPY, 2015, 38 (03) : 161 - 169
  • [42] Adherence to Labor Arrest and Failed Induction of Labor Guidelines: The Impact of a Quality-Improvement Educational Intervention
    Cate, Jennifer J. M.
    Arkfeld, Christopher K.
    Campol, Meagan
    Campbell, Katherine H.
    Pettker, Christian M.
    Illuzzi, Jessica L.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, 2024, 13 (16)
  • [43] Cost-effectiveness of elective induction of labor at 41 weeks in nulliparous women
    Kaimal, Anjali J.
    Little, Sarah E.
    Odibo, Anthony O.
    Stamilio, David M.
    Grobman, William A.
    Long, Elisa F.
    Owens, Douglas K.
    Caughey, Aaron B.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2011, 204 (02) : 137.e1 - 137.e9
  • [44] Induction of Labor According to Medical Indications: A Critical Evaluation through a Prospective Study
    Monari, Francesca
    Pellegrini, Rosamaria
    Menichini, Daniela
    Spelta, Eleonora
    Tarozzi, Giulia
    Grandi, Giovanni
    Facchinetti, Fabio
    CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2022, 49 (08)
  • [45] Is the Bishop-score significant in predicting the success of labor induction in multiparous women?
    Navve, D.
    Orenstein, N.
    Ribak, R.
    Daykan, Y.
    Shechter-Maor, G.
    Biron-Shental, T.
    JOURNAL OF PERINATOLOGY, 2017, 37 (05) : 480 - 483
  • [46] Predictors of response after a second attempt of pharmacological labor induction: a retrospective study
    Mariani, Luca Liban
    Mancarella, Matteo
    Fuso, Luca
    Novara, Lorenzo
    Menato, Guido
    Biglia, Nicoletta
    ARCHIVES OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS, 2020, 302 (01) : 117 - 125
  • [47] Gestational age-specific severe maternal morbidity associated with labor induction
    Liu, Shiliang
    Joseph, K. S.
    Hutcheon, Jennifer A.
    Bartholomew, Sharon
    Leon, Juan Andres
    Walker, Mark
    Kramer, Michael S.
    Liston, Robert M.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2013, 209 (03)
  • [48] Clinical factors and ultrasound parameters to predict successful vaginal delivery following labour induction
    Won, Young Bin
    Han, Sang Won
    Kim, Eui Hyeok
    JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2020, 40 (03) : 360 - 366
  • [49] Induction of labor at full-term in pregnant women with uncomplicated singleton pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials
    Saccone, Gabriele
    Della Corte, Luigi
    Maruotti, Giuseppe M.
    Quist-Nelson, Johanna
    Raffone, Antonio
    De Vivo, Valentino
    Esposito, Gennaro
    Zullo, Fulvio
    Berghella, Vincenzo
    ACTA OBSTETRICIA ET GYNECOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 2019, 98 (08) : 958 - 966
  • [50] Clinical and ultrasonographic parameters in assessment of labor induction success in nulliparous women
    Bila, Jovan
    Plesinac, Snezana
    Vidakovic, Snezana
    Spremovic, Svetlana
    Terzic, Milan
    Dotlic, Jelena
    Kalezic Vukovic, Ivana
    JOURNAL OF MATERNAL-FETAL & NEONATAL MEDICINE, 2020, 33 (23) : 3990 - 3997