Induction of labour at or beyond 37 weeks' gestation

Philippa Middleton, Emily Shepherd, Jonathan Morris, Caroline A Crowther, Judith C Gomersall, Philippa Middleton, Emily Shepherd, Jonathan Morris, Caroline A Crowther, Judith C Gomersall

Abstract

Background: Risks of stillbirth or neonatal death increase as gestation continues beyond term (around 40 weeks' gestation). It is unclear whether a policy of labour induction can reduce these risks. This Cochrane Review is an update of a review that was originally published in 2006 and subsequently updated in 2012 and 2018.

Objectives: To assess the effects of a policy of labour induction at or beyond 37 weeks' gestation compared with a policy of awaiting spontaneous labour indefinitely (or until a later gestational age, or until a maternal or fetal indication for induction of labour arises) on pregnancy outcomes for the infant and the mother.

Search methods: For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (17 July 2019), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in pregnant women at or beyond 37 weeks, comparing a policy of labour induction with a policy of awaiting spontaneous onset of labour (expectant management). We also included trials published in abstract form only. Cluster-RCTs, quasi-RCTs and trials using a cross-over design were not eligible for inclusion in this review. We included pregnant women at or beyond 37 weeks' gestation. Since risk factors at this stage of pregnancy would normally require intervention, only trials including women at low risk for complications, as defined by trialists, were eligible. The trials of induction of labour in women with prelabour rupture of membranes at or beyond term were not considered in this review but are considered in a separate Cochrane Review.

Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

Main results: In this updated review, we included 34 RCTs (reporting on over 21,000 women and infants) mostly conducted in high-income settings. The trials compared a policy to induce labour usually after 41 completed weeks of gestation (> 287 days) with waiting for labour to start and/or waiting for a period before inducing labour. The trials were generally at low to moderate risk of bias. Compared with a policy of expectant management, a policy of labour induction was associated with fewer (all-cause) perinatal deaths (risk ratio (RR) 0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 0.64; 22 trials, 18,795 infants; high-certainty evidence). There were four perinatal deaths in the labour induction policy group compared with 25 perinatal deaths in the expectant management group. The number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) with induction of labour, in order to prevent one perinatal death, was 544 (95% CI 441 to 1042). There were also fewer stillbirths in the induction group (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.75; 22 trials, 18,795 infants; high-certainty evidence); two in the induction policy group and 16 in the expectant management group. For women in the policy of induction arms of trials, there were probably fewer caesarean sections compared with expectant management (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.85 to 0.95; 31 trials, 21,030 women; moderate-certainty evidence); and probably little or no difference in operative vaginal births with induction (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.10; 22 trials, 18,584 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Induction may make little or difference to perineal trauma (severe perineal tear: RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.26; 5 trials; 11,589 women; low-certainty evidence). Induction probably makes little or no difference to postpartum haemorrhage (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.15, 9 trials; 12,609 women; moderate-certainty evidence), or breastfeeding at discharge (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.04; 2 trials, 7487 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Very low certainty evidence means that we are uncertain about the effect of induction or expectant management on the length of maternal hospital stay (average mean difference (MD) -0.19 days, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.18; 7 trials; 4120 women; Tau² = 0.20; I² = 94%). Rates of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission were lower (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80 to 0.96; 17 trials, 17,826 infants; high-certainty evidence), and probably fewer babies had Apgar scores less than seven at five minutes in the induction groups compared with expectant management (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.96; 20 trials, 18,345 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). Induction or expectant management may make little or no difference for neonatal encephalopathy (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.31; 2 trials, 8851 infants; low-certainty evidence, and probably makes little or no difference for neonatal trauma (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.49; 5 trials, 13,106 infants; moderate-certainty evidence) for induction compared with expectant management. Neurodevelopment at childhood follow-up and postnatal depression were not reported by any trials. In subgroup analyses, no differences were seen for timing of induction (< 40 versus 40-41 versus > 41 weeks' gestation), by parity (primiparous versus multiparous) or state of cervix for any of the main outcomes (perinatal death, stillbirth, NICU admission, caesarean section, operative vaginal birth, or perineal trauma).

Authors' conclusions: There is a clear reduction in perinatal death with a policy of labour induction at or beyond 37 weeks compared with expectant management, though absolute rates are small (0.4 versus 3 deaths per 1000). There were also lower caesarean rates without increasing rates of operative vaginal births and there were fewer NICU admissions with a policy of induction. Most of the important outcomes assessed using GRADE had high- or moderate-certainty ratings. While existing trials have not yet reported on childhood neurodevelopment, this is an important area for future research. The optimal timing of offering induction of labour to women at or beyond 37 weeks' gestation needs further investigation, as does further exploration of risk profiles of women and their values and preferences. Offering women tailored counselling may help them make an informed choice between induction of labour for pregnancies, particularly those continuing beyond 41 weeks - or waiting for labour to start and/or waiting before inducing labour.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00385229 NCT01076062.

Conflict of interest statement

Philippa Middleton: none known.

Caroline A Crowther: none known.

Jonathan Morris: none known.

Emily Shepherd: none known.

Judith Gomersall: none known.

Copyright © 2020 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Figures

1
1
Study flow diagram.
2
2
'Risk of bias' graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
3
3
'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
4
4
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), outcome: 1.1 Perinatal death.
5
5
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), outcome: 1.2 Stillbirth.
6
6
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), outcome: 1.3 Neonatal death.
7
7
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), outcome: 1.5 Admission to neonatal intensive care unit.
8
8
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), outcome: 1.9 Meconium aspiration syndrome.
9
9
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), outcome: 1.11 Apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes.
10
10
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), outcome: 1.12 Birthweight (g).
11
11
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), outcome: 1.15 Caesarean section.
12
12
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), outcome: 1.16 Operative vaginal birth (forceps or ventouse).
13
13
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), outcome: 1.20 Postpartum haemorrhage.
14
14
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), outcome: 1.28 Length of labour (hours).
1.1. Analysis
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 1: Perinatal death
1.2. Analysis
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 2: Stillbirth
1.3. Analysis
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 3: Neonatal death
1.4. Analysis
1.4. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 4: Birth asphyxia
1.5. Analysis
1.5. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 5: Admission to neonatal intensive care unit
1.6. Analysis
1.6. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 6: Neonatal convulsions
1.7. Analysis
1.7. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 7: Neonatal encephalopathy (HIE)
1.8. Analysis
1.8. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 8: Use of anticonvulsants
1.9. Analysis
1.9. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 9: Meconium aspiration syndrome
1.10. Analysis
1.10. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 10: Pneumonia
1.11. Analysis
1.11. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 11: Apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes
1.12. Analysis
1.12. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 12: Birthweight (g)
1.13. Analysis
1.13. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 13: Birthweight > 4000 g
1.14. Analysis
1.14. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 14: Neonatal (birth) trauma
1.15. Analysis
1.15. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 15: Caesarean section
1.16. Analysis
1.16. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 16: Operative vaginal birth (forceps or ventouse)
1.17. Analysis
1.17. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 17: Analgesia used
1.18. Analysis
1.18. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 18: Perineal trauma
1.19. Analysis
1.19. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 19: Prolonged labour
1.20. Analysis
1.20. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 20: Postpartum haemorrhage
1.21. Analysis
1.21. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 21: Breastfeeding
1.22. Analysis
1.22. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 22: Maternal satisfaction
1.23. Analysis
1.23. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 23: Maternal satisfaction
1.24. Analysis
1.24. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 24: Length of maternal hospital stay (days)
1.25. Analysis
1.25. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 25: Length of maternal (postnatal) stay (categories)
1.26. Analysis
1.26. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 26: Length of neonatal hospital stay (days)
1.27. Analysis
1.27. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 27: Length of neonatal (postnatal) stay (categories)
1.28. Analysis
1.28. Analysis
Comparison 1: Labour induction versus expectant management (all trials), Outcome 28: Length of labour (hours)
2.1. Analysis
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2: Labour induction versus expectant management (subgroup analysis by gestational age at induction), Outcome 1: Perinatal death
2.2. Analysis
2.2. Analysis
Comparison 2: Labour induction versus expectant management (subgroup analysis by gestational age at induction), Outcome 2: Stillbirth
2.3. Analysis
2.3. Analysis
Comparison 2: Labour induction versus expectant management (subgroup analysis by gestational age at induction), Outcome 3: Admission to neonatal intensive care unit
2.4. Analysis
2.4. Analysis
Comparison 2: Labour induction versus expectant management (subgroup analysis by gestational age at induction), Outcome 4: Caesarean section
2.5. Analysis
2.5. Analysis
Comparison 2: Labour induction versus expectant management (subgroup analysis by gestational age at induction), Outcome 5: Operative vaginal birth (forceps or ventouse)
2.6. Analysis
2.6. Analysis
Comparison 2: Labour induction versus expectant management (subgroup analysis by gestational age at induction), Outcome 6: Perineal trauma
3.1. Analysis
3.1. Analysis
Comparison 3: Labour induction versus expectant management (subgroup analysis by parity), Outcome 1: Perinatal death
3.2. Analysis
3.2. Analysis
Comparison 3: Labour induction versus expectant management (subgroup analysis by parity), Outcome 2: Stillbirth
3.3. Analysis
3.3. Analysis
Comparison 3: Labour induction versus expectant management (subgroup analysis by parity), Outcome 3: Admission to neonatal intensive care unit
3.4. Analysis
3.4. Analysis
Comparison 3: Labour induction versus expectant management (subgroup analysis by parity), Outcome 4: Caesarean section
3.5. Analysis
3.5. Analysis
Comparison 3: Labour induction versus expectant management (subgroup analysis by parity), Outcome 5: Operative vaginal birth (forceps or ventouse)
3.6. Analysis
3.6. Analysis
Comparison 3: Labour induction versus expectant management (subgroup analysis by parity), Outcome 6: Perineal trauma (severe perineal tear)
4.1. Analysis
4.1. Analysis
Comparison 4: Labour induction versus expectant management (subgroup analysis by status of cervix), Outcome 1: Perinatal death
4.2. Analysis
4.2. Analysis
Comparison 4: Labour induction versus expectant management (subgroup analysis by status of cervix), Outcome 2: Stillbirth
4.3. Analysis
4.3. Analysis
Comparison 4: Labour induction versus expectant management (subgroup analysis by status of cervix), Outcome 3: Admission to neonatal intensive care unit
4.4. Analysis
4.4. Analysis
Comparison 4: Labour induction versus expectant management (subgroup analysis by status of cervix), Outcome 4: Caesarean section
4.5. Analysis
4.5. Analysis
Comparison 4: Labour induction versus expectant management (subgroup analysis by status of cervix), Outcome 5: Operative vaginal birth (forceps or ventouse)
4.6. Analysis
4.6. Analysis
Comparison 4: Labour induction versus expectant management (subgroup analysis by status of cervix), Outcome 6: Perineal trauma

Source: PubMed

3
Subscribe