We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Discrimination by parity is a prerequisite for assessing induction of labour outcome - cross-sectional study.
- Authors
Denona, Branko; Foley, Michael; Mahony, Rhona; Robson, Michael
- Abstract
<bold>Background: </bold>To demonstrate that studies on induction of labour should be analyzed by parity as there is a significant difference in the labour outcome among induced nulliparous and multiparous women.<bold>Methods: </bold>Obstetric outcome, specifically caesarean section rates, among induced term nulliparous and multiparous women without a previous caesarean section were analyzed in this cross-sectional study using the Robson 10 group classification for the year 2016.<bold>Results: </bold>In the total number of 8851 women delivered in 2016, the caesarean section rates among nulliparous women in spontaneous and induced labour, Robson groups 1 and 2A, were 7.84% (151/1925) and 32.63% (437/1339) respectively and among multiparous (excluding those women with a previous caesarean section), Robson group 3 and 4A were 1%(24/2389) and 4.37% (44/1005), respectively. Pre labour caesarean rates for nulliparous and multiparous women, Robson groups 2B and 4B (Robson M, Fetal Matern Med Rev, 12; 23-39, 2001) were 3.91% (133/3397) and 2.86% (100/3494), of the respective single cephalic cohort at term.<bold>Conclusion: </bold>The data suggests that studies on induction of labour should be analyzed by parity as there is a significant difference between nulliparous and multiparous women.
- Subjects
INDUCED labor (Obstetrics); CESAREAN section; LABOR (Obstetrics); CROSS-sectional method; OBSTETRICS surgery; TREATMENT failure; PARITY (Obstetrics); LABOR complications (Obstetrics)
- Publication
BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth, 2020, Vol 20, Issue 1, pN.PAG
- ISSN
1471-2393
- Publication type
journal article
- DOI
10.1186/s12884-020-03334-8