A study on implementation of WHO labour care guide in low-risk pregnant women and its impact on maternal and perinatal outcome


  • Srividya N. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, NRI Institute of Medical Sciences, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India
  • Sri Jhansi Lakshmi M. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, NRI Institute of Medical Sciences, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India




WHO labour care guide, WHO modified partograph, Indian parturient


Background: WHO Labour Care Guide is a labour monitoring tool that is developed to support respectful maternity to provide positive childbirth experience with evidence-based recommendations.

Methods: This is an observational study comparing WHO labour care guide with WHO modified partograph in low-risk pregnant women who are in active phase of labour. The study included 80 labouring women who are divided into two groups with 40 participants in each group. In group 1 WHO modified partograph was used and in group 2 WHO labour care guide was used as a tool to assess the course of labour. Maternal and perinatal outcomes were analysed for both the groups.

Results: There is no significant difference in the caesarean section rates and instrumental deliveries between the two groups. There is a rise in the incidence of PPH and meconium-stained liquor in group 2 compared to group 1. None of the participants had labour beyond 12 hours. NICU admissions were higher in group 2.

Conclusions: In our study, the WHO modified partograph was found as equivalent to WHO labour care guide in identifying prolonged labor. Also, maternal and perinatal outcomes were equally identified by both types of partograph. WHO labour care guide did not prove to be beneficial over WHO modified partograph in terms of maternal and perinatal outcomes in Indian parturient women.

Author Biography

Srividya N., Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, NRI Institute of Medical Sciences, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India

Obstetrics and gynecology,  professor


Maternal mortality rates-A tabulation of available information. Available at: https://apps.who.int/ iris/handle/10665/272290. Accessed on 20 November 2021.

Porreco RP. High Caesarean section Rate; a new perspective. Obstet Gynecol. 1985;65:307-11

Derom TM. Review of evaluation studies on caesarean section part I, trends in caesarean section and perinatal mortality. Available at: https://www. who.int/news/item/16-06-2021. Accessed on 20 November 2021.

Mahler H. The safe motherhood initiative; A call to action. Lancet. 1987;3:668-70.

Fatusi AO, Makinda ON, Adeyemi AB, Oriji EO, Onwudiegw UU. Evaluation of health workers training in use of partogram. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2008;100;41-4.

WHO recommenations: intrapartum care for a positive childbirth experience. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241550215. Accessed on 20 November 2021.

Oladapo OT, Diaz V, Bonet M, Abalos E, Thwin SS, Souza H, et al. Cervical dilatation patterns of ‘low-risk’ women with spontaneous labour and normal perinatal outcomes: a systematic review. BJOG. 2018; 125(8):944-54.

Abalos E, Oladapo OT, Chamillard M, Diaz V, Pasquale J, Bonet M, et al. Duration of spontaneous labour in ‘low-risk’ women with ‘normal’ perinatal outcomes: a systematic review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018;223:123-32.

Maaløe N, van Roosmalen J, Dmello B, Kwast B, van den Akker T, Housseine N, et al. WHO next-generation partograph: revolutionary steps towards individualised labour care? BJOG. 2022;129(5):682-4.

Joshua P, Comrie T, Veronica P, Luis G, Hadiza G. Usability, acceptability and feasibility of the World Health Organization Labour Care Guide: A mixed methods, multicountry evaluation. Birth. 2021;48(1): 66-75.

Beenu KS, Anshuman S. Graphico-statistical analysis of contemporary labour patterns and associated influencing factors in Indian parturient. Indian Obstet Gynaecol. 2021;11(2):14-9.






Original Research Articles