Methods of induction of labour: a systematic review.
Methods of induction of labour: a systematic review.
复制标题
DOI:
10.1186/1471-2393-11-84
复制
发表时间:
2011-10-27
影响因子:
3.1
通讯作者:
Keeton KL
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Mozurkewich EL;Chilimigras JL;Berman DR;Perni UC;Romero VC;King VJ;Keeton KL
Rates of labour induction are increasing. We conducted this systematic review to assess the evidence supporting use of each method of labour induction. We listed methods of labour induction then reviewed the evidence supporting each. We searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library between 1980 and November 2010 using multiple terms and combinations, including labor, induced/or induction of labor, prostaglandin or prostaglandins, misoprostol, Cytotec, 16,16,-dimethylprostaglandin E2 or E2, dinoprostone; Prepidil, Cervidil, Dinoprost, Carboprost or hemabate; prostin, oxytocin, misoprostol, membrane sweeping or membrane stripping, amniotomy, balloon catheter or Foley catheter, hygroscopic dilators, laminaria, dilapan, saline injection, nipple stimulation, intercourse, acupuncture, castor oil, herbs. We performed a best evidence review of the literature supporting each method. We identified 2048 abstracts and reviewed 283 full text articles. We preferentially included high quality systematic reviews or large randomised trials. Where no such studies existed, we included the best evidence available from smaller randomised or quasi-randomised trials. We included 46 full text articles. We assigned a quality rating to each included article and a strength of evidence rating to each body of literature. Prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) and vaginal misoprostol were more effective than oxytocin in bringing about vaginal delivery within 24 hours but were associated with more uterine hyperstimulation. Mechanical methods reduced uterine hyperstimulation compared with PGE2 and misoprostol, but increased maternal and neonatal infectious morbidity compared with other methods. Membrane sweeping reduced post-term gestations. Most included studies were too small to evaluate risk for rare adverse outcomes. Research is needed to determine benefits and harms of many induction methods.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI:
10.1080/14767050902906386
发表时间:
2009-10
期刊:
The journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine : the official journal of the European Association of Perinatal Medicine, the Federation of Asia and Oceania Perinatal Societies, the International Society of Perinatal Obstetricians
影响因子:
--
作者:
Asher GN;Coeytaux RR;Chen W;Reilly AC;Loh YL;Harper TC
通讯作者:
Harper TC
影响因子:
9.8
作者:
Heinemann, Jennifer;Gillen, Geoff;Kaunitz, Andrew M.
通讯作者:
Kaunitz, Andrew M.
DOI:
10.1016/j.ijgo.2007.09.027
发表时间:
2008-04-01
影响因子:
3.8
作者:
Habib, Sherif M.;Emam, Safa S.;Saber, Aza S.
通讯作者:
Saber, Aza S.
影响因子:
4
作者:
Cates CJ
通讯作者:
Cates CJ
影响因子:
7.2
作者:
Hamdan, Mukhri;Sidhu, Kiren;Tan, Peng Chiong
通讯作者:
Tan, Peng Chiong