Identifying the effective components of a standardized labor induction protocol: secondary analysis of a randomized, controlled trial.

Rebecca F Hamm, Rinad Beidas, Sindhu K Srinivas, Lisa D Levine
{"title":"Identifying the effective components of a standardized labor induction protocol: secondary analysis of a randomized, controlled trial.","authors":"Rebecca F Hamm,&nbsp;Rinad Beidas,&nbsp;Sindhu K Srinivas,&nbsp;Lisa D Levine","doi":"10.1080/14767058.2021.1909561","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Standardized labor induction protocols utilizing evidence-based active management practices are associated with improved obstetric outcomes. However, these protocols are complex and include multiple components. We aimed to identify which of the individual components of an evidence-based labor induction protocol are most associated with reduced rates of cesarean delivery, maternal morbidity, and neonatal morbidity.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>This is a secondary analysis of a randomized trial comparing time to delivery among four labor induction methods. All patients enrolled in the trial had their labor managed with a multidisciplinary-developed, evidence-based standardized labor induction protocol. For each patient's induction, we assessed adherence to seven components of the protocol. Primary outcomes included cesarean delivery, maternal morbidity, and neonatal morbidity. Bivariate analyses assessed the association of each protocol component with each outcome. Multivariable logistic regression determined independent predictors of each outcome.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 491 patients enrolled in the randomized trial were included in this analysis. For cesarean delivery, while adherence to four of the seven protocol components was associated with the outcome in bivariate analyses, only adherence to \"cervical exams should be performed every 1-2 h in active labor\" was associated with reduced cesarean rates when controlling for age, body mass index, and parity. For maternal morbidity, while adherence to \"if misoprostol is utilized, it should not be continued beyond 6 doses or 24 h of use\" was associated in bivariate analysis, it was no longer associated with the outcome in multivariable analysis. Finally, \"cervical exams should be performed every 1-2 h in active labor\" and \"cervical exams should be performed every 2-4 h in latent labor\" were associated with reduced neonatal morbidity both in bivariate analyses as well as when controlling for age, body mass index, and parity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Within a standardized labor induction protocol, adherence to cervical exams every 1-2 h in active labor was associated with reduced cesarean rate, and adherence to cervical exams every 2-4 h in latent labor, as well as every 1-2 h in active labor is associated with reduced neonatal morbidity. Regular cervical examination during labor induction likely allows for intervention when cervical change is not made. This data warrants further investigation into the optimal frequency of cervical exams during labor induction. Furthermore, an understanding of which components of a complex, evidence-based labor induction protocol are most effective may be helpful for streamlining and education around this protocol as implementation occurs across diverse sites.</p>","PeriodicalId":520807,"journal":{"name":"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","volume":" ","pages":"6185-6191"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/14767058.2021.1909561","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"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","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2021.1909561","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/4/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Standardized labor induction protocols utilizing evidence-based active management practices are associated with improved obstetric outcomes. However, these protocols are complex and include multiple components. We aimed to identify which of the individual components of an evidence-based labor induction protocol are most associated with reduced rates of cesarean delivery, maternal morbidity, and neonatal morbidity.

Study design: This is a secondary analysis of a randomized trial comparing time to delivery among four labor induction methods. All patients enrolled in the trial had their labor managed with a multidisciplinary-developed, evidence-based standardized labor induction protocol. For each patient's induction, we assessed adherence to seven components of the protocol. Primary outcomes included cesarean delivery, maternal morbidity, and neonatal morbidity. Bivariate analyses assessed the association of each protocol component with each outcome. Multivariable logistic regression determined independent predictors of each outcome.

Results: The 491 patients enrolled in the randomized trial were included in this analysis. For cesarean delivery, while adherence to four of the seven protocol components was associated with the outcome in bivariate analyses, only adherence to "cervical exams should be performed every 1-2 h in active labor" was associated with reduced cesarean rates when controlling for age, body mass index, and parity. For maternal morbidity, while adherence to "if misoprostol is utilized, it should not be continued beyond 6 doses or 24 h of use" was associated in bivariate analysis, it was no longer associated with the outcome in multivariable analysis. Finally, "cervical exams should be performed every 1-2 h in active labor" and "cervical exams should be performed every 2-4 h in latent labor" were associated with reduced neonatal morbidity both in bivariate analyses as well as when controlling for age, body mass index, and parity.

Conclusions: Within a standardized labor induction protocol, adherence to cervical exams every 1-2 h in active labor was associated with reduced cesarean rate, and adherence to cervical exams every 2-4 h in latent labor, as well as every 1-2 h in active labor is associated with reduced neonatal morbidity. Regular cervical examination during labor induction likely allows for intervention when cervical change is not made. This data warrants further investigation into the optimal frequency of cervical exams during labor induction. Furthermore, an understanding of which components of a complex, evidence-based labor induction protocol are most effective may be helpful for streamlining and education around this protocol as implementation occurs across diverse sites.

确定标准化引产方案的有效成分:随机对照试验的二次分析。
目的:采用循证主动管理实践的标准化引产方案与改善产科结果相关。然而,这些协议很复杂,并且包含多个组件。我们的目的是确定以证据为基础的引产方案中哪一个单独的组成部分与降低剖宫产率、产妇发病率和新生儿发病率最相关。研究设计:这是一项比较四种引产方法分娩时间的随机试验的二次分析。所有参加试验的患者都采用多学科开发的、以证据为基础的标准化引产协议进行分娩管理。对于每位患者的诱导,我们评估了对方案七个组成部分的依从性。主要结局包括剖宫产、产妇发病率和新生儿发病率。双变量分析评估了每个方案组成部分与每个结果的关联。多变量逻辑回归确定了每个结果的独立预测因子。结果:纳入随机试验的491例患者被纳入本分析。对于剖宫产,在双变量分析中,虽然遵守七个方案组成部分中的四个与结果相关,但在控制年龄、体重指数和胎次的情况下,只有遵守“活产时每1-2小时进行一次宫颈检查”与降低剖宫产率相关。对于产妇发病率,在双变量分析中,虽然坚持“如果使用米索前列醇,不应继续使用超过6剂量或24小时”是相关的,但在多变量分析中,它不再与结果相关。最后,在双变量分析以及控制年龄、体重指数和胎次的情况下,“活产时应每1-2小时进行宫颈检查”和“潜伏产时应每2-4小时进行宫颈检查”与新生儿发病率降低相关。结论:在标准化引产方案中,在产程中每1-2小时坚持宫颈检查与降低剖宫产率相关,在潜伏产程中每2-4小时坚持宫颈检查,以及在产程中每1-2小时坚持宫颈检查与降低新生儿发病率相关。引产期间的定期宫颈检查可能允许在宫颈未发生变化时进行干预。这一数据值得进一步研究引产期间宫颈检查的最佳频率。此外,了解复杂的、以证据为基础的引产方案的哪些组成部分是最有效的,可能有助于在不同地点实施该方案时简化和教育该方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信