Comparison of spontaneous labour with induced labour in nulliparous women using modified WHO partograph

Pramila Yadav, Menka Verma, Sumedha Harne, Megha Sharma


Background: Childbirth is the period from the onset of regular uterine contraction until expulsion of placenta. The process by which this normally occurs is called labour. Induction of labour is the artificial initiation of uterine contraction prior to their spontaneous onset, leading to progressive dilatation and effacement of the cervix and delivery of the baby. Labour induction is indicated where the benefits to either the mother or the fetus outweighs the benefit of continuing pregnancy. The aim and objectives of the study was to study the progress of labour in nulliparous women who are having spontaneous labour and in those with induced labour in terms of augmentation of labour, mode of delivery, neonatal outcome and maternal complication.

Methods: This was a randomized comparative study. The study was conducted in department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at a tertiary care private centre during time period of May 2014 to May 2015 on 120 pregnant women divided into two groups i.e. A and B consisting of 60 women each. All women were nulliparous and ≥ 37 weeks of gestation age. Those women who had spontaneous onset of labour and reached ≥ 4cm cervical dilatation were included in group A and those who were induced with 25 mcg misoprostol vaginally and reached ≥ 4cm of cervical dilatation were included in group B. Progress of labour was monitored by Modified WHO partograph.

Results: The mean duration of labour after 4cm of cervical dilation in spontaneous labour onset group was 5.43 hours and in the induced group was 5.41 hours with p value0.865, which was statistically not significant. In spontaneous labour onset group, 39.3% of patients required augmentation of labour with oxytocin compared to 69% of induced group (p value-0.001). More women had vaginal delivery in spontaneous onset labour group (73.3%) comparative to induced group (53.3%) with pvalue-0.023. There was less caesarean section among those in spontaneous labour than induced labour (20% versus 41.7%) (p=0.010).While most women of induced labour cases reached or crossed action line compared to spontaneous labour (35% versus 16.7%) p=0.022 ,there were more cases in spontaneous labour moving between alert and action line (23.3% versus 10%) p=0.049 .Neonatal outcome and maternal complications were similar in both the group .

Conclusions: We conclude from this study that requirement of augmentation for progress of labour was more in induced group, rate of caesarean section was also high but it does not adversely affect the neonatal outcome and maternal complication if labour is monitored with Modified WHO partograph.


Augmentation of labour, Induced labour, Neonatal outcome, Partograph

Full Text:



Cunningham FG, Leveno KJ, Bloom SL, Hauth JC, Rouse DJ, Spong YC. Normal Labor and Delivery; Willim Obstetrics. 23rd Edition. USA. McGraw-Hill. 2010;17:373-87.

Donald I. Management of labour, In: Mishra R. Practical obstetric problems, 7th edition, New Delhi. BI publication Pvt Ltd. 2014;24:466-80.

Mathai M. The Partograph for the prevention of Obstructed Labour. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2009;52(2):256-69.

Mathews JE, Rajaratnam A, George A, Mathai M. Comparison of two World Health Organization (WHO) partographs. Int J Gynecol. 2007;96(2):147-15010.

WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA & World Bank. Pregnancy, childbirth, Postpartum and Newborn Care; A Guide for Essential Practice. Geneva; WHO; 2006.

Selo-Ojeme D, Rogers C, Mohanty A, Zaidi N, Villar R, Shangaris P. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2011;284(2);337-41.

Alyasin ZT, Al-Salami KS, Abd al abbas H. Comparison between elective labour induction and spontaneous onset of labour in prolonged pregnancy. Bas J Surg. March 16, 2010. Available from:

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

Murlidhar L, Malini KV, Shetty VH. Partographic Analysis of Spontaneous Labour at Term in Primigravida. The journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India. 2012;62(6):635-40.

Jankiraman V, Ecker J, Kaimal AJ. Comparing the second stage in induced and spontaneous labour. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(3):606-11.

Kudagi LB, Sailaja L, Kumar PR, Babu SC. A comparative study of intravaginal misoprostol with intracervical dinoprostone gel for induction of labour in pregnancy. Asian J Pharm Clin Res. 2013:6(2):174-8.