DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20180049

Comparison of progress of labour and maternofetal outcome among induced versus spontaneous labour in nulliparous women using modified WHO partograph

Anamika Singh, Smitha B. Rao, Bhavana Sherigar, Reena D’souza, Soumya R., Vismaya Kaveri

Abstract


Background: Induced or spontaneous labour has implication on the eventual mode of delivery and neonatal outcome. The aim of study is to compare the progress and outcome of induced versus spontaneous labour among nulliparous women using the modified WHO partograph.

Methods: Comparative study involving nulliparous women in active phase of labour with the cervix at least 4cm dilated. Those whose labours were induced were compared with those on spontaneous labour; both labouring women were monitored using modified WHO partograph. Outcome measures include the mean duration of labour, the eventual mode of delivery and the Maternofetal outcome. Data were managed using SPSS software. Chi-square t-test and student t-test were used in data analysis. Level of significance was placed at P<0.05.

Results: 115 women were compared in each group. There was no difference in mean age group, gestational age at delivery, cervical dilatation on admission, and the level of head of fifth palpable on admission. More women had spontaneous vaginal delivery among those in spontaneous labour (72.1% versus 64.7%) P=0.0001. There were less caesarean section among those in spontaneous labour. The mean Apgar scores were significantly better among induced labour babies (P=0.0001).

Conclusions: Induced labour may increase the chances of caesarean section, it does not adversely affect the neonatal outcome. Therefore, it is advised induced labour can be a safe procedure among nulliparous women if labour is partographically monitored.


Keywords


Induced versus spontaneous labour, Labour outcome, Modified WHO partograph, Nulliparous women

Full Text:

PDF

References


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

Donald I. Management of labour, In: Mishra R. Practical obstetric problems, 7th ed, 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- 150.

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

Leighton BL, Halpern SH. The effects of epidural analgesia on labor, maternal, and neonatal outcomes: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002 May;186(5):S69-77.

Grivell Rosalie M, Reilly AJ, Oakey H, Chan A, Dodd JM; Maternal and neonatal outcomes following induction of labor: a cohort study. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecol Scand. 2012;91(2):198-203.

Hoffman MK, Vahratian A, Sciscione AC, Troendle JF, Zhang J. Comparison of progression between induced and non-induced women. J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;107(5):1029-34.

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 J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;3(1):24-8.

Yadav P, Verma M, Harne S, Sharma M. Comparison of spontaneous labour with induced labour in nulliparous women using modified WHO partograph. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Dec;5(11):4005-8.

Suchika G, Usha S, Premlata M, Madhu M. To study the fetomaternal outcome and progress of labour among induced versus spontaneous labour in nulliparous women (using modified WHO Partograph). Sch J App Med Sci. 2014;2(5A):1577-80.