PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 16885663

Preinduction cervical assessment.

Keri A Baacke·Rodney K Edwards
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The rate of labor induction is increasing in the United States. Methods for quantifying cervical factors have been developed to identify patients who may benefit from cervical ripening before induction. The first cervical scoring systems used digital examination. More recently, cervical ultrasound and testing for the presence of fetal fibronectin have been suggested to evaluate cervical readiness for labor induction, but neither of these methods provides a significant improvement over digital examination. The Bishop score, the most widely used digital examination scoring system, still is the most cost effective and accurate method of evaluating the cervix before labor induction.

Explore related subjects

Cervical RipeningCervix UteriFemaleFibronectinsHumansLabor, InducedPhysical ExaminationPregnancyUltrasonographyJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Keri A Baacke, Rodney K Edwards. 2006. Preinduction cervical assessment.. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003081-200609000-00016

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2006

Extra-amniotic saline infusion increases cesarean risk versus other induction methods and spontaneous labor.

Extra-amniotic saline infusion (EASI) via a Foley catheter has been thought to be comparable in efficacy to other induction and cervical ripening methods. This study examines the risk of cesarean delivery associated with EASI compared with spontaneous labor and other methods of cervical ripening. A retrospective cohort study based upon deliveries at Bellevue Hospital Center from August 2000 to December 2002 was conducted. Three groups were identified: EASI, other methods of induction such as prostaglandins and oxytocin administration, and spontaneous labor. Pairwise comparisons were performed using analysis of variance and multivariate logistic regression analysis to control for confounding variables. There were 625 charts evaluated: including 171 with EASI, 190 with other induction methods, and 264 with spontaneous labor. The rates of cesarean section were 33.9%, 17.9%, and 7.2%, respectively. When compared with spontaneous labor, there was a higher risk of cesarean delivery for subjects induced with other methods (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3 to 4.5; P < 0.001), and for those induced with EASI (adjusted OR, 5.5; 95% CI, 3.1 to 9.9; P < 0.001). When EASI was compared with other methods of induction, the risk of cesarean delivery was still increased (adjusted OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.4 to 3.8; P = 0.001). EASI is associated with an increased risk of cesarean delivery compared with spontaneous labor and other methods of cervical ripening.

Cervical Ripening↗
PubMed2006

Hyaluronidase for cervical ripening and induction of labour.

BACKGROUND: Dilatation and effacement of the cervix are not only a result of uterine contractions, but are also dependent upon ripening processes within the cervix. The cervix is a fibrous organ composed principally of hyaluronic acid, collagen and proteoglycan. Hyaluronic acid increases markedly after the onset of labour. An increase in the level of hyaluronic acid is associated with an increase in tissue water content. Cervical ripening during labour is characterised by changes of the cervix and an increased water content. Cervical injection of hyaluronidase was postulated to increase cervical ripening. This is one of a series of reviews of methods of cervical ripening and labour induction using standardised methodology. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of hyaluronidase for third trimester cervical ripening or induction of labour in comparison with other methods of induction of labour. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register (January 2006) and bibliographies of relevant papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Clinical trials of hyaluronidase for third trimester cervical ripening or labour induction. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: A strategy was developed to deal with the large volume and complexity of trial data relating to labour induction. This involved a two-stage method of data extraction. We assessed trial quality. We contacted study authors for additional information. We collected adverse effects information from the trials. MAIN RESULTS: One trial, with 168 women participating, was included in the review. When compared with placebo for cervical ripening intracervical injections of hyaluronidase resulted in women receiving significantly fewer caesarean sections (18% versus 49%, relative risk (RR) 0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22 to 0.61), less need for oxytocin augmentation (10% versus 47%, RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.41), and increased cervical favourability after 24 hours (60% versus 98%, RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.74). No side-effects for mother or baby were reported in this trial. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Intracervical injections of hyaluronidase for cervical ripening appear beneficial. However, this is not common practice. In addition it is an invasive procedure that women may find unacceptable in the presence of less invasive methods.

Cervical Ripening↗
PubMed2006

Finger-assisted stretching technique for cesarean section.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the perioperative outcomes of two cesarean section methods, the finger-assisted stretching technique (FAST), based on a modified Joel-Cohen method, with the traditional technique. METHODS: A retrospective review of the records of 416 women who underwent cesarean sections at Guro Hospital, Seoul, Korea, between May 1993 and December 2001 was performed. Of the 416 women, 283 underwent cesarean sections with FAST and 133 with the traditional technique. RESULTS: Operative time was significantly shorter with FAST (15.3 vs. 42.6 min, P<.05), and FAST was associated with lower blood loss (601 vs. 928 mL, P<.05) and shorter hospital stay (3.7 vs. 6.5 days, P<.05). There were no significant differences in wound infection, voiding difficulty, and postoperative adhesions between the two methods. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that FAST may be the better technique.

Cervical Ripening↗