Attitudes of pregnant women and healthcare professionals to labour induction and obtaining consent for labour induction

Coates, Rose

doi:10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2021.08.008

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Evidence regarding women's experience of IOL is currently limited and heterogeneous. Further research is required using validated scales for the assessment of satisfaction across multiple stages of the induction and birth process 57 . Difficulties in accurately assessing experience of IOL were noted by the SWEPIS study: there may be bias in favour of IOL due to the recruitment of women who were motivated towards it 51 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Further research is required using validated scales for the assessment of satisfaction across multiple stages of the induction and birth process. 57 Difficulties in accurately assessing experience of IOL were noted by the SWEPIS study: there may be bias in favour of IOL due to the recruitment of women who were motivated towards it. 51 Future trials should use randomisation with stratification by potential confounders (parity, maternal age, and BMI) to encourage equal distribution across the intervention groups, and increased recruitment of older women, those who conceived with ART, and black, Asian, and minority ethnic groups.…”

Section: Practical and Research Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Timing of induction of labour in the prevention of prolonged pregnancy: Systematic review with meta‐analysis

Geneen

Gilbert

Reeves

et al. 2022

Repro Female Child Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To update the systematic review which informed the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline "Inducing Labour" (NG207), including additional data and analyses, and comparison with a recent individual patient data analysis of 41-versus 42-week induction. Search Strategy: Multiple database search (including Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase) from inception to 10th September 2021 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different induction timing in uncomplicated singleton pregnancies. Data Collection and Analysis: One reviewer screened, extracted, analysed, and assessed the quality/certainty of the evidence (using ROB1 and GRADE), with second reviewer verification. Main Results: Five week-to-week comparisons, and one overall comparison (induction vs. delayed induction, 20 RCTs, n = 15 725 pregnant women) for assessment of predefined subgroups. Most data were for 41 versus 42 weeks and 39 versus 41 weeks: 10 times as many participants as the other week-to-week comparisons. There was evidence of an effect at 41 versus 42 weeks (five RCTs, n = 5819) in favour of 41-week induction: fewer perinatal deaths and neonatal intensive care unit admissions (low-to-moderate certainty of the evidence); there was no evidence of an effect in either direction for the remaining outcomes (verylow to moderate certainty). There was no evidence of an effect for outcomes

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Practical and Research Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%