Comparing expectant management and spontaneous labor approaches in studying the effect of labor induction on cesarean delivery

被引:17
作者
Danilack, Valery A. [1 ,2 ]
Triche, Elizabeth W. [1 ,7 ]
Dore, David D. [3 ,4 ]
Muri, Janet H. [5 ]
Phipps, Maureen G. [1 ,2 ,6 ]
Savitz, David A. [1 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Brown Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol, Providence, RI 02912 USA
[2] Brown Univ, Women & Infants Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Res, Providence, RI 02905 USA
[3] Brown Univ, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Res, Providence, RI 02912 USA
[4] Optum Epidemiol, Waltham, MA USA
[5] Qual Analyt Serv Inc, Natl Perinatal Informat Ctr, Providence, RI USA
[6] Brown Univ, Warren Alpert Med Sch, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Providence, RI 02912 USA
[7] Mt Sinai Rehabil Hosp, Mandell MS Ctr, St Francis Care, Hartford, CT USA
关键词
Cesarean section; Induced labor; Pregnancy; Obstetric delivery; ELECTIVE-INDUCTION; NULLIPAROUS WOMEN; IDENTIFY INDICATIONS; POSTTERM PREGNANCY; NEONATAL OUTCOMES; RISK-FACTORS; TERM; SECTION; PRETERM;
D O I
10.1016/j.annepidem.2016.04.009
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Purpose: Evidence of the impact of labor induction on cesarean delivery (CD) remains inconclusive because of differing methodological approaches. A spontaneous labor comparison group describes patterns retrospectively, whereas an expectant management comparison group prospectively evaluates a decision to induce. We examined the influence of comparison group on the association between labor induction and CD. Methods: We studied 166,559 mother-newborn dyads from 14 National Perinatal Information Center member hospitals, 2007-2012. We included singleton births 34-42 completed weeks' gestation and excluded women with contraindications to vaginal delivery. We calculated risk ratios (RR) adjusted for hypertensive and diabetic disorders, intrauterine growth restriction, parity, and maternal age. Results: When comparing induction to spontaneous labor, induction had significantly lower risk for CD at weeks 34-35 (adjusted RR [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.6 [0.5, 0.7] for week 34 and 0.7 [0.6, 0.8] for week 35) and higher risk at weeks 37-41 (adjusted RRs [95% CIs]: 1.8 [1.6, 2.1], 2.1 [1.9, 2.2], 1.8 [1.7, 1.9], 1.9 [1.8, 2.0], and 1.6 [1.5, 1.7], respectively). When comparing induction to expectant management, adjusted RRs [95% CIs] were significantly below 1.0 for week 34 (0.8 [0.7, 0.9]), week 36 (0.9 [0.8, 0.9]), and week 37 (0.9 [0.8, 0.9]), and were only elevated at week 40 (1.4 [1.3, 1.4]) and week 41 (1.4 [1.3,1.5]). Conclusions: Using two different methodological approaches with the same sample, we confirm that comparing labor induction to spontaneous onset of labor, instead of expectant management of pregnancy, does not fully inform clinical practice and may lead to an exaggerated estimate of the risk of CD. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:405 / 411
页数:7
相关论文
共 41 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2012, BENCHM HLTH CAR
  • [2] Induction versus expectant monitoring for intrauterine growth restriction at term: randomised equivalence trial (DIGITAT)
    Boers, K. E.
    Vijgen, S. M. C.
    Bijlenga, D.
    van der Post, J. A. M.
    Bekedam, D. J.
    Kwee, A.
    van der Salm, P. C. M.
    van Pampus, M. G.
    Spaanderman, M. E. A.
    de Boer, K.
    Duvekot, J. J.
    Bremer, H. A.
    Hasaart, T. H. M.
    Delemarre, F. M. C.
    Bloemenkamp, K. W. M.
    van Meir, C. A.
    Willekes, C.
    Wijnen, E. J.
    Rijken, M.
    le Cessie, S.
    Roumen, F. J. M. E.
    Thornton, J. G.
    van Lith, J. M. M.
    Mol, B. W. J.
    Scherjon, S. A.
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2010, 341 : c7087
  • [3] Outcome after elective labor induction in nulliparous women: A matched cohort study
    Cammu, H
    Martens, G
    Ruyssinck, G
    Amy, JJ
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2002, 186 (02) : 240 - 244
  • [4] Induction of labor and cesarean delivery by gestational age
    Caughey, Aaron B.
    Nicholson, James M.
    Cheng, Yvonne W.
    Lyell, Deirdre J.
    Washington, A. Eugene
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2006, 195 (03) : 700 - 705
  • [5] Systematic Review: Elective Induction of Labor Versus Expectant Management of Pregnancy
    Caughey, Aaron B.
    Sundaram, Vandana
    Kaimal, Anjali J.
    Gienger, Allison
    Cheng, Yvonne W.
    McDonald, Kathryn M.
    Shaffer, Brian L.
    Owens, Douglas K.
    Bravata, Dena M.
    [J]. ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2009, 151 (04) : 252 - W63
  • [6] ABC of labour care - Induction
    Chamberlain, G
    Zander, L
    [J]. BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1999, 318 (7189) : 995 - 998
  • [7] Induction of Labor in the United States: A Critical Appraisal of Appropriateness and Reducibility
    Chauhan, Suneet P.
    Ananth, Cande V.
    [J]. SEMINARS IN PERINATOLOGY, 2012, 36 (05) : 336 - 343
  • [8] Induction of labor compared to expectant management in low-risk women and associated perinatal outcomes
    Cheng, Yvonne W.
    Kaimal, Anjali J.
    Snowden, Jonathan M.
    Nicholson, James M.
    Caughey, Aaron B.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2012, 207 (06) : 502.e1 - 502.e8
  • [9] Elective Induction of Labor Symposium: Nomenclature, Research Methodological Issues, and Outcomes
    Darney, Blair G.
    Caughey, Aaron B.
    [J]. CLINICAL OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2014, 57 (02) : 343 - 362
  • [10] Elective Induction of Labor at Term Compared With Expectant Management Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes
    Darney, Blair G.
    Snowden, Jonathan M.
    Cheng, Yvonne W.
    Jacob, Lorie
    Nicholson, James M.
    Kaimal, Anjali
    Dublin, Sascha
    Getahun, Darios
    Caughey, Aaron B.
    [J]. OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2013, 122 (04) : 761 - 769