Evaluation of labor progression in induced and spontaneous labor using modified WHO partograph in term primigravida: a hospital-based comparative study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20262081Keywords:
Spontaneous labor, Primigravida, Neonatal outcome, Maternal outcome, Induced labor, Modified WHO partographAbstract
Background: Induction of labor is commonly performed to improve maternal and neonatal outcomes; however, its effectiveness compared to spontaneous labor remains debated. Monitoring labor progress using the modified WHO partograph provides an objective way to assess outcomes. To compare the progress and outcomes of induced labor with spontaneous labor among primigravida women at term.
Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Chattogram Medical College Hospital, Bangladesh, from March 2018 to February 2019. A total of 130 primigravida women at term (41⁰⁄₇–41⁶⁄₇ weeks) were selected using purposive sampling and divided equally into spontaneous labor (n=65) and induced labor (n=65) groups. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to ensure comparability. Labor was monitored using the modified WHO partograph. Data on socio-demographic variables, labor progression, mode of delivery, maternal and neonatal outcomes were collected and analyzed using SPSS version 23. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.
Results: There was no significant difference in socio-demographic characteristics between the groups. The induced group had significantly higher mean gestational age (41.61±0.48 vs 41.21±0.01 weeks; p<0.001) and BMI (24.07±1.32 vs 22.63±1.55 kg/m²; p<0.001). The rate of normal vaginal delivery was slightly higher in the spontaneous group (86.2%) compared to the induced group (78.5%), though not statistically significant. Caesarean section rates were comparable (9.2% vs 12.3%). Labor progression assessed by partograph showed no significant difference between groups, with most women remaining within the alert line. However, the duration of labor was significantly shorter in the induced group, with a reduced first stage (7.59±0.85 vs 10.53±1.04 hours; p<0.001) and second stage (45.05±8.28 vs 49.10±7.99 minutes; p=0.001). Maternal complications were minimal and comparable between groups. Neonatal outcomes, including Apgar scores, birth asphyxia, meconium aspiration and NICU admission, showed no statistically significant differences.
Conclusions: Induced labor is comparable to spontaneous labor in terms of maternal and neonatal outcomes among primigravida at term. Although induction shortens the duration of labor, it does not significantly increase adverse outcomes or operative delivery rates.
References
Olabinjo AO, Abubakar SO, Gunna S, Eleheimer MAS, Taha RSS, Al-Abri SAM. Fetomaternal outcomes of induced versus spontaneous labor in an urban Omani hospital. Oman Med J. 2025;40(2):99.
Middleton P, Shepherd E, Morris J, Crowther CA, Gomersall JC. Induction of labour at or beyond 37 weeks' gestation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;7(7):4945.
World Health Organization. WHO recommendations: induction of labour at or beyond term. Geneva: World Health Organization. 2018.
Lavanya S, Reddy M, Kumar P. Comparative study of induced versus spontaneous labour using modified WHO partograph. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2026;15(1):45-50.
Malshetty R, Patil S, Desai A. Comparative analysis of maternal and fetal outcomes in spontaneous versus induced labour among post-dated pregnancies. Healthcare Bulletin. 2025;5(2):112-8.
Yadav K, Verma P, Sharma S, Sharma M. Comparison of spontaneous labour with induced labour in nulliparous women using modified WHO partograph. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2020;9(11):4505-8.
Sun C, Li X, Zhao Y. Use of WHO partograph in labour management: a systematic review. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2024;24(1):1-10.
Lavender T, Cuthbert A, Smyth RMD. Effect of partograph use on outcomes for women in spontaneous labour at term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;(8):5461.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. First and second stage labor management. Washington (DC). ACOG. 2024;5:587.
Ferdaushi Z, Rahman MM, Islam MA, Ahmed S, Begum F. Outcome of spontaneous versus induced labour in postdated pregnancy. J Bangladesh Coll Physicians Surg. 2022;40(3):37-9.
Khanam KA, Rahman MM, Akter N, Begum S, Islam R. Outcome of medical induction of labour in postdated pregnancy. Saudi J Med Pharm Sci. 2023;3:934.
Fatema K, Ahmed T, Sultana N, Rahman M, Akter S, Islam N, et al. Outcome among spontaneous and induced labour in nulliparous women. Int J Pharm Clin Res. 2024;8:54.
Gadhavi KP, Patel H, Parmar K, Shah D, Joshi P, Mehta R, et al. A comparative study of feto-maternal outcome and progress of labor among induced versus spontaneous labor. Int J Pharm Clin Res. 2024;3:87.
Alalem D, Kafy S, Hashim H, Aldukkan L, Bajahmom H. Spontaneous versus induced labor delivery: a retrospective analysis. Adv Reprod Sci. 2019;7(1):1-6.
Laikemariam M, Teshome A, Alemu B, Bekele D, Tesfaye A, Worku M, et al. Adverse neonatal outcomes among induced and spontaneous labour. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2023;23(1):307.
Hong J, Atkinson J, Mitchell AR, Tong S, Walker SP, Middleton A, et al. Comparison of maternal labor-related complications and neonatal outcomes following elective induction of labor at 39 weeks of gestation versus expectant management: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(5):2313162.
Jeer B, Smith A, Wilson K, Brown R, Taylor M, Davis P, et al. Perinatal and maternal outcomes according to timing of induction of labour. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2023;288:175-82.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
