Introduction
This study examined the prevalence of and risk factors for a prolonged passive second stage of labor in nulliparous women.
Material and Methods
This was a historical cohort study of all nulliparous women (n = 1131) at two delivery units in Sweden. Maternal and obstetric data were obtained from electronic medical records during 2019. Duration of the passive second stage was measured as time from retracted cervix to start of pushing. Prolonged passive second stage was defined as ≥2 h. Prevalence was calculated and associations between prolonged passive second stage and maternal, obstetric and neonatal characteristics and potential risk factors were assessed using logistic regression models.
Results
The prevalence of prolonged passive second stage was 37.6%. Factors associated with an increased risk of prolonged passive second stage were epidural analgesia (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.93; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.90–5.34), malpresentation (aOR 2.26; 95% CI 1.27–4.05), maternal age ≥ 30 years (aOR 2.00; 95% CI 1.50–2.65) and birthweight ≥ 4 kg (aOR 1.50; 95% CI 1.05–2.15). Maternal body mass index ≥30 (aOR 0.52; 95% CI 0.34–0.79) and noncohabiting (aOR 0.51; 95% CI 0.30–0.89) reduced the odds of prolonged passive second stage.
Conclusions
A prolonged passive second stage of labor in nulliparous women is common (n = 425 [38%]). We found epidural analgesia, malpresentation, maternal age ≥ 30 years and birthweight ≥4 kg to be major risk factors associated with an increased risk of a prolonged passive second stage. Birth outcomes for prolonged passive second stage need to be investigated to strengthen evidence for the management of the second stage of labor.
Objective
To investigate the mode of delivery and birth outcomes in relation to the duration of the passive second stage of labour in nulliparous women.
Methods and findings
A retrospective cohort study of all nulliparous women (n = 1131) at two delivery units in Sweden. Maternal and obstetric data were obtained from electronic medical records during 2019. The passive second stage was defined as the complete dilation of the cervix until the start of the active second stage. The duration of the passive second stage was categorized into three groups: 0 to 119 min (0 to <2 h), 120–239 min (2- <4h) and ≥240 min (≥4h). Differences between the groups were examined using t-test and Chi2-tests and regression analyses were used to analyse adjusted odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals. The primary outcome was mode of delivery in relation to the duration of the passive second stage and the secondary outcomes covered a series of adverse maternal and neonatal birth outcomes. The rates of instrumental and caesarean deliveries increased as the duration of the passive second stage increased. A ≥4-hour duration of the passive second stage was associated with a nine-times increased risk of caesarean section, and a four-times risk of instrumental delivery compared to a duration of <2 hours in the adjusted analyses. No differences were found in the maternal birth outcomes. The risk of a 5-minute Apgar score <7 was increased in the 2-<4h group. A longer passive second stage was not associated with an increased risk of negative birth experience.
Conclusions
Our study demonstrates an increased risk of operative delivery for a longer duration (>2h) of the passive second stage in nulliparous women, although most of the women gave birth by spontaneous vaginal delivery even after ≥4 hours. There was no evidence of an increased risk of adverse maternal outcomes in a longer duration of the passive second stage but there were indications of increased adverse neonatal outcomes. Assessment of fetal well-being is important when the duration of the passive phase is prolonged.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.