Comparison of caesarean section rate and maternal complications in elective induction versus spontaneous labor

Salma Kousar Beigh; Samar Mukhtar; Nighat Firdous; Fariha Amaan

doi:10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20214340

Authors

Salma Kousar Beigh Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Government Medical College Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India
Samar Mukhtar Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Government Medical College Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India
Nighat Firdous Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Government Medical College Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India
Fariha Amaan Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Government Medical College Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20214340

Keywords:

Caesarean section, Elective induction, Maternal complications, Spontaneous labour

Abstract

Background: Elective induction of labor is defined as an initiation of labor, either by mechanical or pharmacological means at a time earlier than nature regardless of a medical or obstetric indication. Objectives were to estimate the proportion of caesarean sections and vaginal deliveries and magnitude of maternal complications following elective induction and spontaneous labor.

Methods: The study entitled “comparison of caesarean section rate and maternal complications in elective induction versus spontaneous labor in LD Hospital, Kashmir” was a hospital based observational study, conducted in the Postgraduate Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, LallaDed Hospital of Government Medical College, Srinagar over a period of one and a half years.

Results: Women in induced labor group had slightly increased risk of caesarean section than those in spontaneous group. Fetal distress was the most common indication for caesarean section in both the groups. There was no difference in both groups regarding maternal complications such as perineal lacerations; postpartum hemorrhage (PPH); need for blood transfusions and post partum hospital stay.

Conclusions: Though induction of labor is associated with a slight increased risk of caesarean delivery, it is not related to other maternal complications. Therefore inductions are safe in hands of safe obstetricians.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Author Biography

Salma Kousar Beigh, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Government Medical College Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India

Obstetrics and Gynaecology

References

Smith PL, Nagourney AB, McLean HF, Usher HR. Hazards and benefits of elective induction of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1984;148:579-85.

Vierhout ME, Out JJ, Wallenburg HC. Elective induction of labor: a prospective clinical study, I: obstetric and neonatal effects. J Perinat Med. 1985;13:155-62.

Macer AJ, Macer an LC, Chan SI. Elective induction versus spontaneous labor- a retrospective study of complications and outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;166:1690-97.

Jackson M, Regan C. Elective induction of labor. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1997;40:496-509.

Glantz JC. Elective induction versus spontaneous labor associations and outcome. J Reprod Med. 2005;50(4):235-40.

Dublin S, Lydon-Rochelle M, Kaplan RC, Watts DH, Critchiow CW. Maternal and neonatal outcomes after induction of labor without an identified indication. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182:986-94.

Leveno C, Hauth B, Spong R. Normal labor and delivery. In: Cunningham FG, Lenovo KJ, Bloom SL, Dashe JS, Hoffman BL, Casey BM, et al, eds. Williams Obstetrics. 23rd edition. McGraw Hill Publication; 2010:374.

Mitchell MD, Flent AP, Bibby J, Brunt J. Rapid increase in plasma PG concentration after vaginal examination and amniotomy. Br Med J. 1977;2(6096):1183-5.

ACOG Committee. ACOG Committe Opinion. New US Food and Drug Administration labeling on cytotec (misoprostol) use and pregnancy. Number 283, May 2003. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2003;82(1):137-8.

Goel K, Gedem J. Induction of labor- a review. Indian J Clin Pract. 2014;24(11).

Caroline A. Induced versus spontaneous labor: comparison of outcome of delivery. Dissertation submitted to Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Karnataka, Bangalore. 2008.

Heffner LJ, Elkin E, Fretts RC. Impact of labor induction, gestational age, and maternal age on cesarean delivery rates. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;102(2):287-93.

Orji EO, Olabode TO. Comparative study of labor progress and delivery outcome among induced versus spontaneous labor in nulliparous women using modified WHO partograph. Nepal J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;3(1):24-8.

Johnson DP, Davis NR, Brown AJ. Risk of caesarean delivery after induction at term in nulliparous women with an unfavorable cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188:1565-72.

Guerra GV, Cecatti JG, Souza JP, Faúndes A, Morais SS, Gülmezoglu AM, et al. Elective induction versus spontaneous labour in Latin America. Bull World Health Organ. 2011;89:657-65.

Macer AJ, Macer LC, Chan SI. Elective induction versus spontaneous labor- a retrospective study of complications and outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1992;166:1690-7.