门诊颈椎机械催熟与住院标准催熟的比较。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Mary P Goering, Whitney L Wunderlich, Marc C Vacquier, David A Watson, Kelly A Drake, Sandra I Hoffman, Anna Schulte, Laura C Colicchia, Abbey C Sidebottom
{"title":"门诊颈椎机械催熟与住院标准催熟的比较。","authors":"Mary P Goering, Whitney L Wunderlich, Marc C Vacquier, David A Watson, Kelly A Drake, Sandra I Hoffman, Anna Schulte, Laura C Colicchia, Abbey C Sidebottom","doi":"10.1055/a-2553-9258","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to assess clinical efficiency and maternal and neonatal outcomes for patients who underwent outpatient cervical ripening using mechanical methods (osmotic dilators and Foley balloon) compared with patients who underwent inpatient ripening.A retrospective cohort study from March 2020 to March 2022 compared patients with low-risk, term, singleton pregnancies who underwent outpatient cervical ripening to clinically similar patients who had inpatient ripening. Inverse probability of treatment weighting for analysis of outcomes to account for differences in groups and comparisons of outcomes are reported as mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).The cohort included 391 patients (116 outpatient, 275 inpatient). Among the outpatient group, half used only mechanical devices, and all others received additional pharmacological methods after admission for labor induction. Among the inpatient group, the most common cervical ripening method was pharmacological only (66.2%), followed by both pharmacological and mechanical (25.8%), and 8% used only mechanical. After outpatient cervical ripening, patients had significantly higher cervical dilation (mean difference 1.9 cm, 95% CI: 1.6, 2.3) and simplified bishop scores (mean difference 1.6, 95% CI: 1.2, 2.1) on admission compared with the inpatient group. The average time from admission to delivery was 5.8 hours shorter (95% CI: -8.6, -2.9) for the outpatient group compared with the inpatient group, and the average total length of stay was 7.1 hours shorter (95% CI: -12.1, -2.1) for the outpatients among patients with vaginal deliveries. Both groups had similar hours of oxytocin use, and mode of delivery, and did not differ for maternal complications or neonatal outcomes.Outpatient cervical ripening using multiple mechanical methods was associated with significantly higher cervical dilation, shorter average time from patient admission to delivery, and shorter total length of stay for vaginal deliveries. Outpatient cervical ripening may be an important option for easing resource utilization for induced labor. · Outpatient cervical ripening resulted in superior cervical dilation and Bishop scores.. · Hospital length of stay was shorter for those receiving outpatient cervical ripening.. · Maternal complications and neonatal outcomes did not differ by setting..</p>","PeriodicalId":7584,"journal":{"name":"American journal of perinatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Outpatient Mechanical Cervical Ripening Methods to Standard Inpatient Ripening.\",\"authors\":\"Mary P Goering, Whitney L Wunderlich, Marc C Vacquier, David A Watson, Kelly A Drake, Sandra I Hoffman, Anna Schulte, Laura C Colicchia, Abbey C Sidebottom\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2553-9258\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study aimed to assess clinical efficiency and maternal and neonatal outcomes for patients who underwent outpatient cervical ripening using mechanical methods (osmotic dilators and Foley balloon) compared with patients who underwent inpatient ripening.A retrospective cohort study from March 2020 to March 2022 compared patients with low-risk, term, singleton pregnancies who underwent outpatient cervical ripening to clinically similar patients who had inpatient ripening. Inverse probability of treatment weighting for analysis of outcomes to account for differences in groups and comparisons of outcomes are reported as mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).The cohort included 391 patients (116 outpatient, 275 inpatient). Among the outpatient group, half used only mechanical devices, and all others received additional pharmacological methods after admission for labor induction. Among the inpatient group, the most common cervical ripening method was pharmacological only (66.2%), followed by both pharmacological and mechanical (25.8%), and 8% used only mechanical. After outpatient cervical ripening, patients had significantly higher cervical dilation (mean difference 1.9 cm, 95% CI: 1.6, 2.3) and simplified bishop scores (mean difference 1.6, 95% CI: 1.2, 2.1) on admission compared with the inpatient group. The average time from admission to delivery was 5.8 hours shorter (95% CI: -8.6, -2.9) for the outpatient group compared with the inpatient group, and the average total length of stay was 7.1 hours shorter (95% CI: -12.1, -2.1) for the outpatients among patients with vaginal deliveries. Both groups had similar hours of oxytocin use, and mode of delivery, and did not differ for maternal complications or neonatal outcomes.Outpatient cervical ripening using multiple mechanical methods was associated with significantly higher cervical dilation, shorter average time from patient admission to delivery, and shorter total length of stay for vaginal deliveries. Outpatient cervical ripening may be an important option for easing resource utilization for induced labor. · Outpatient cervical ripening resulted in superior cervical dilation and Bishop scores.. · Hospital length of stay was shorter for those receiving outpatient cervical ripening.. · Maternal complications and neonatal outcomes did not differ by setting..</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7584,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of perinatology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of perinatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2553-9258\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of perinatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2553-9258","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在评估门诊使用机械方法(渗透扩张器和Foley球囊)进行宫颈成熟的患者与住院成熟的患者的临床效率和母婴结局。2020年3月至2022年3月的一项回顾性队列研究比较了门诊宫颈成熟的低风险、足月、单胎妊娠患者和住院成熟的临床相似患者。结果分析中考虑组间差异和结果比较的治疗加权逆概率报告为95%置信区间(ci)的平均差异。该队列包括391例患者(116例门诊患者,275例住院患者)。在门诊组中,一半仅使用机械装置,其他所有患者在入院后接受额外的药物方法进行引产。住院组中,仅采用药理学成熟方法最多(66.2%),其次为药理学和机械成熟方法(25.8%),仅采用机械成熟方法的占8%。门诊宫颈成熟后,患者入院时宫颈扩张(平均差异1.9 cm, 95% CI: 1.6, 2.3)和简化主教评分(平均差异1.6,95% CI: 1.2, 2.1)明显高于住院组。门诊组从入院到分娩的平均时间比住院组短5.8小时(95% CI: -8.6, -2.9),阴道分娩的门诊患者平均总住院时间短7.1小时(95% CI: -12.1, -2.1)。两组使用催产素的时间和分娩方式相似,产妇并发症和新生儿结局没有差异。门诊使用多种机械方法的宫颈成熟与宫颈扩张程度显著提高、从患者入院到分娩的平均时间缩短以及阴道分娩的总住院时间缩短相关。门诊宫颈成熟可能是缓解引产资源利用的重要选择。·门诊宫颈成熟导致宫颈扩张和Bishop评分更高。·门诊宫颈成熟患者住院时间较短。·产妇并发症和新生儿结局没有不同的设置。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Outpatient Mechanical Cervical Ripening Methods to Standard Inpatient Ripening.

This study aimed to assess clinical efficiency and maternal and neonatal outcomes for patients who underwent outpatient cervical ripening using mechanical methods (osmotic dilators and Foley balloon) compared with patients who underwent inpatient ripening.A retrospective cohort study from March 2020 to March 2022 compared patients with low-risk, term, singleton pregnancies who underwent outpatient cervical ripening to clinically similar patients who had inpatient ripening. Inverse probability of treatment weighting for analysis of outcomes to account for differences in groups and comparisons of outcomes are reported as mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).The cohort included 391 patients (116 outpatient, 275 inpatient). Among the outpatient group, half used only mechanical devices, and all others received additional pharmacological methods after admission for labor induction. Among the inpatient group, the most common cervical ripening method was pharmacological only (66.2%), followed by both pharmacological and mechanical (25.8%), and 8% used only mechanical. After outpatient cervical ripening, patients had significantly higher cervical dilation (mean difference 1.9 cm, 95% CI: 1.6, 2.3) and simplified bishop scores (mean difference 1.6, 95% CI: 1.2, 2.1) on admission compared with the inpatient group. The average time from admission to delivery was 5.8 hours shorter (95% CI: -8.6, -2.9) for the outpatient group compared with the inpatient group, and the average total length of stay was 7.1 hours shorter (95% CI: -12.1, -2.1) for the outpatients among patients with vaginal deliveries. Both groups had similar hours of oxytocin use, and mode of delivery, and did not differ for maternal complications or neonatal outcomes.Outpatient cervical ripening using multiple mechanical methods was associated with significantly higher cervical dilation, shorter average time from patient admission to delivery, and shorter total length of stay for vaginal deliveries. Outpatient cervical ripening may be an important option for easing resource utilization for induced labor. · Outpatient cervical ripening resulted in superior cervical dilation and Bishop scores.. · Hospital length of stay was shorter for those receiving outpatient cervical ripening.. · Maternal complications and neonatal outcomes did not differ by setting..

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American journal of perinatology
American journal of perinatology 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
302
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Perinatology is an international, peer-reviewed, and indexed journal publishing 14 issues a year dealing with original research and topical reviews. It is the definitive forum for specialists in obstetrics, neonatology, perinatology, and maternal/fetal medicine, with emphasis on bridging the different fields. The focus is primarily on clinical and translational research, clinical and technical advances in diagnosis, monitoring, and treatment as well as evidence-based reviews. Topics of interest include epidemiology, diagnosis, prevention, and management of maternal, fetal, and neonatal diseases. Manuscripts on new technology, NICU set-ups, and nursing topics are published to provide a broad survey of important issues in this field. All articles undergo rigorous peer review, with web-based submission, expedited turn-around, and availability of electronic publication. The American Journal of Perinatology is accompanied by AJP Reports - an Open Access journal for case reports in neonatology and maternal/fetal medicine.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信