Nav: Home

Small benefit of inducing labor over 'wait and see' approach for late-term pregnancies

February 20, 2019

Inducing labour at 41 weeks of pregnancy leads to a small reduction in birth complications compared with expectant management (a "wait and see" approach) until 42 weeks in low risk women, finds a clinical trial published by The BMJ today.

However, the absolute risk of serious problems was low in both groups - and a linked editorial says the results are not sufficiently conclusive to change current practice, which is in line with the authors' interpretation.

Late term pregnancy (at or beyond 42 weeks) affects about 15% of women and is associated with increased problems at birth (known as adverse perinatal outcomes), including death.

Some studies suggest that inducing labour from 41 weeks onwards improves outcomes for both mother and baby, but these studies were different regarding their measures, protocols and time frames of comparison and so the results need to be interpreted with caution.

Yet despite these concerns, induction at 41 weeks is now an accepted policy in many countries throughout the world.

So researchers of the INDEX-team led by senior researcher Esteriek de Miranda at the Amsterdam UMC-University of Amsterdam, set out to compare induction of labour at 41 weeks with expectant management until 42 weeks in low risk pregnancies.

The trial included 1800 women (mainly white and younger than 35 years) with an uncomplicated pregnancy recruited from 123 midwifery practices and 45 hospitals in the Netherlands.

Women were randomised to either induction at 41 weeks or expectant management until 42 weeks with subsequent induction if necessary.

Adverse perinatal outcomes were assessed using a combined measure of the newborn's health (including perinatal death, Apgar score of less than 7 five minutes after birth, and admission to an intensive care baby unit). Other outcomes included type of delivery and mother's health just after giving birth.

Fifteen women (1.7%) in the induction group had an adverse perinatal outcome compared with 28 (3.1%) in the expectant management group - an absolute risk difference of 1.4% in favour of the induction group.

Eleven (1.2%) infants in the induction group and 23 (2.6%) in the expectant management group had an Apgar score of less than 7 out of 10 at five minutes.

No infants in the induction group and three (0.3%) in the expectant management group had an Apgar score of less than 4 out of 10 at five minutes.

One fetal death (0.1%) occurred in the induction group and two (0.2%) in the expectant management group. No neonatal deaths (deaths in the first 28 days of life) occurred.

Three (0.3%) infants in the induction group versus 8 (0.9%) in the expectant management group were admitted to an intensive care baby unit.

No significant differences in the mother's health or in caesarean section rates were found between groups.

The researchers point to some potential limitations, but say in this large trial induction of labour at 41 weeks resulted in less overall adverse perinatal outcome than a policy of expectant management until 42 weeks, although the absolute risk of severe adverse outcome was low in both groups.

As with every intervention in the natural birth process, the decision to induce labour must be made with caution, as the expected benefits should outweigh possible adverse effects for both mother and child, they add.

As such, they say their results "should be used to inform women approaching 41 weeks of pregnancy, so they can weigh the respective outcomes and decide whether to be induced at 41 weeks or to continue pregnancy until 42 weeks."

In a linked editorial, Professor Sara Kenyon at the University of Birmingham and colleagues welcome this new trial, but say the results "are not sufficiently conclusive to change current practice."

They point out that, if the Apgar scores are excluded, "the remaining data suggest little to choose between the two management options." And they warn that increasing induction rates (35% of women giving birth for the first time are currently induced in the UK) "may also impact negatively on women's birth experience."
-end-


BMJ

Related Pregnancy Articles:

Paracetamol during pregnancy can inhibit masculinity
Paracetamol during pregnancy can inhibit masculinity Paracetamol during pregnancy can inhibit the development of 'male behavior' in mice.
The cost of opioid use during pregnancy
A new study published today by the scientific journal Addiction reveals that the incidence of neonatal abstinence syndrome -- often caused by mothers using opioids during pregnancy -- is increasing in the United States, and carries an enormous burden in terms of hospital days and costs.
New study: Pre-pregnancy BMI directly linked to excess pregnancy weight gain
It's well known that excessive weight gain during pregnancy can have a lasting negative impact on the health of a mother and her baby.
Pregnancy-specific β1-glycoproteins
Development of new strategies and novel drug design to treat trophoblastic diseases and to provide pregnancy success are of crucial importance in maintenance the female reproductive health.
Should hypothyroidism in pregnancy be treated?
When a woman becomes pregnant, many changes occur in her body.
Pre-pregnancy progesterone helps women with recurrent pregnancy loss
Women who have had two or more unexplained miscarriages can benefit from natural progesterone treatment before pregnancy, a new a study from the University of Illinois at Chicago shows.
Male pipefish pregnancy, it's complicated
In the upside-down world of the pipefish, sexual selection appears to work in reverse, with flashy females battling for males who bear the pregnancy and carry their young to term in their brood pouch.
Pregnancy leads to changes in the mother's brain
A study directed by researchers from the UAB and IMIM are the first to reveal how pregnancy causes long-lasting alterations in brain structure, probably related to improving the mother's ability to protect and interact with the child.
MRIs during pregnancy and outcomes for infants, children
In an analysis that included more than 1.4 million births, exposure to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) during the first trimester of pregnancy compared with nonexposure was not associated with increased risk of harm to the fetus or in early childhood, although gadolinium MRI at any time during pregnancy was associated with an increased risk of a broad set of rheumatological, inflammatory, or skin conditions and, possibly, for stillbirth or neonatal death, according to a study appearing in the Sept.
The benefits of exercise during pregnancy
Women who exercise during pregnancy are more likely to deliver vaginally than those who do not, and show no greater risk of preterm birth.

Related Pregnancy Reading:

Best Science Podcasts 2019

We have hand picked the best science podcasts for 2019. Sit back and enjoy new science podcasts updated daily from your favorite science news services and scientists.
Now Playing: TED Radio Hour

Digital Manipulation
Technology has reshaped our lives in amazing ways. But at what cost? This hour, TED speakers reveal how what we see, read, believe — even how we vote — can be manipulated by the technology we use. Guests include journalist Carole Cadwalladr, consumer advocate Finn Myrstad, writer and marketing professor Scott Galloway, behavioral designer Nir Eyal, and computer graphics researcher Doug Roble.
Now Playing: Science for the People

#529 Do You Really Want to Find Out Who's Your Daddy?
At least some of you by now have probably spit into a tube and mailed it off to find out who your closest relatives are, where you might be from, and what terrible diseases might await you. But what exactly did you find out? And what did you give away? In this live panel at Awesome Con we bring in science writer Tina Saey to talk about all her DNA testing, and bioethicist Debra Mathews, to determine whether Tina should have done it at all. Related links: What FamilyTreeDNA sharing genetic data with police means for you Crime solvers embraced...