低危单胎妊娠妇女40周和41周引产妊娠结局的比较:一项回顾性队列研究

IF 2.8 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Hua He, Wei Ren, Shiyu Li, Chaoli Chen, Wenpei Zheng
{"title":"低危单胎妊娠妇女40周和41周引产妊娠结局的比较:一项回顾性队列研究","authors":"Hua He, Wei Ren, Shiyu Li, Chaoli Chen, Wenpei Zheng","doi":"10.1186/s12884-025-07691-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The best timing of delivery for term pregnancies has not been determined. This retrospective cohort study compared pregnancy outcomes between induction of labor (IOL) at 40 weeks and 41 weeks in low-risk women with singleton pregnancies and investigated maternal motivations regarding elective IOL.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 603 pregnant women were included in this study, with 342 (56.7%) undergoing IOL at 40-40<sup>+ 6</sup> weeks and 261 (43.3%) at 41-41<sup>+ 6</sup> weeks. The primary pregnancy outcome was the rate of cesarean section (CS), and the secondary pregnancy outcomes included the rates of neonatal asphyxia and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission. Maternal motivations regarding elective IOL were investigated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The rate of CS was 25.1% in the IOL at 40-40<sup>+ 6</sup> weeks group and 33.7% in the IOL at 41-41<sup>+ 6</sup> weeks group (p = 0.021). The three most prevalent indications for CS in both groups were: (1) non-reassuring fetal heart rate patterns (NRFHRP); (2) meconium-stained amniotic fluid; and (3) failed induction of labor. Compared with the 41-week IOL group, women who underwent IOL at 40 weeks' gestation exhibited higher educational attainment (93.6% vs. 82.0%, P < 0.001), a higher proportion of high-income families (91.5% vs. 68.2%, P < 0.001), a higher proportion of multiparae (24.0% vs. 16.5%, P < 0.05), a lower proportion of ripeness of the cervix (27.5% vs. 37.2%, P < 0.05), shorter hospitalization durations (5.84 ± 1.79 vs. 6.17 ± 1.95, P < 0.05), and higher hospitalization costs (13627.39 ± 3227.56 vs. 10837.77 ± 3276.73, P < 0.001). No significant intergroup differences were observed in the rates of neonatal asphyxia and NICU admission. The most common motivation for elective IOL was concern regarding fetal distress or stillbirth. Parity ≥ 1 and a Bishop score ≥ 6 were protective factors against CS following IOL.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>IOL at 40 weeks did not result in increased adverse outcomes compared to IOL at 41 weeks. Parturients with higher education and income were more likely to choose elective IOL. Parity ≥ 1 and a Bishop score ≥ 6 were protective factors against CS following IOL. These may provide a new option for clinical decision-making.</p>","PeriodicalId":9033,"journal":{"name":"BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth","volume":"25 1","pages":"586"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12085817/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of pregnancy outcomes between induction of labor at 40 weeks and 41 weeks in low-risk women with Singleton pregnancies: a retrospective cohort study.\",\"authors\":\"Hua He, Wei Ren, Shiyu Li, Chaoli Chen, Wenpei Zheng\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12884-025-07691-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The best timing of delivery for term pregnancies has not been determined. This retrospective cohort study compared pregnancy outcomes between induction of labor (IOL) at 40 weeks and 41 weeks in low-risk women with singleton pregnancies and investigated maternal motivations regarding elective IOL.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 603 pregnant women were included in this study, with 342 (56.7%) undergoing IOL at 40-40<sup>+ 6</sup> weeks and 261 (43.3%) at 41-41<sup>+ 6</sup> weeks. The primary pregnancy outcome was the rate of cesarean section (CS), and the secondary pregnancy outcomes included the rates of neonatal asphyxia and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission. Maternal motivations regarding elective IOL were investigated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The rate of CS was 25.1% in the IOL at 40-40<sup>+ 6</sup> weeks group and 33.7% in the IOL at 41-41<sup>+ 6</sup> weeks group (p = 0.021). The three most prevalent indications for CS in both groups were: (1) non-reassuring fetal heart rate patterns (NRFHRP); (2) meconium-stained amniotic fluid; and (3) failed induction of labor. Compared with the 41-week IOL group, women who underwent IOL at 40 weeks' gestation exhibited higher educational attainment (93.6% vs. 82.0%, P < 0.001), a higher proportion of high-income families (91.5% vs. 68.2%, P < 0.001), a higher proportion of multiparae (24.0% vs. 16.5%, P < 0.05), a lower proportion of ripeness of the cervix (27.5% vs. 37.2%, P < 0.05), shorter hospitalization durations (5.84 ± 1.79 vs. 6.17 ± 1.95, P < 0.05), and higher hospitalization costs (13627.39 ± 3227.56 vs. 10837.77 ± 3276.73, P < 0.001). No significant intergroup differences were observed in the rates of neonatal asphyxia and NICU admission. The most common motivation for elective IOL was concern regarding fetal distress or stillbirth. Parity ≥ 1 and a Bishop score ≥ 6 were protective factors against CS following IOL.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>IOL at 40 weeks did not result in increased adverse outcomes compared to IOL at 41 weeks. Parturients with higher education and income were more likely to choose elective IOL. Parity ≥ 1 and a Bishop score ≥ 6 were protective factors against CS following IOL. These may provide a new option for clinical decision-making.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9033,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"586\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12085817/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-025-07691-0\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-025-07691-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:足月妊娠的最佳分娩时间尚未确定。本回顾性队列研究比较了低风险单胎妊娠妇女在40周和41周引产(IOL)的妊娠结局,并调查了产妇选择人工晶状体的动机。方法:本研究共纳入603例孕妇,其中40 ~ 40+ 6周行人工晶状体植入术342例(56.7%),41 ~ 41+ 6周行人工晶状体植入术261例(43.3%)。主要妊娠结局为剖宫产率(CS),次要妊娠结局包括新生儿窒息率和新生儿重症监护病房(NICU)入院率。调查了产妇选择人工晶状体的动机。结果:40 ~ 40+ 6周组CS率为25.1%,41 ~ 41+ 6周组CS率为33.7% (p = 0.021)。两组CS的三个最普遍的适应症是:(1)不可靠的胎儿心率模式(NRFHRP);(2)胎粪染色羊水;(3)引产失败。与41周人工晶状体组相比,40周人工晶状体组的受教育程度更高(93.6% vs. 82.0%)。结论:与41周人工晶状体组相比,40周人工晶状体组的不良后果没有增加。学历和收入较高的产妇更倾向于选择选择性人工晶状体。奇偶校验≥1和Bishop评分≥6是IOL后发生CS的保护因素。这可能为临床决策提供一种新的选择。
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 pregnancy outcomes between induction of labor at 40 weeks and 41 weeks in low-risk women with Singleton pregnancies: a retrospective cohort study.

Background: The best timing of delivery for term pregnancies has not been determined. This retrospective cohort study compared pregnancy outcomes between induction of labor (IOL) at 40 weeks and 41 weeks in low-risk women with singleton pregnancies and investigated maternal motivations regarding elective IOL.

Methods: A total of 603 pregnant women were included in this study, with 342 (56.7%) undergoing IOL at 40-40+ 6 weeks and 261 (43.3%) at 41-41+ 6 weeks. The primary pregnancy outcome was the rate of cesarean section (CS), and the secondary pregnancy outcomes included the rates of neonatal asphyxia and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission. Maternal motivations regarding elective IOL were investigated.

Results: The rate of CS was 25.1% in the IOL at 40-40+ 6 weeks group and 33.7% in the IOL at 41-41+ 6 weeks group (p = 0.021). The three most prevalent indications for CS in both groups were: (1) non-reassuring fetal heart rate patterns (NRFHRP); (2) meconium-stained amniotic fluid; and (3) failed induction of labor. Compared with the 41-week IOL group, women who underwent IOL at 40 weeks' gestation exhibited higher educational attainment (93.6% vs. 82.0%, P < 0.001), a higher proportion of high-income families (91.5% vs. 68.2%, P < 0.001), a higher proportion of multiparae (24.0% vs. 16.5%, P < 0.05), a lower proportion of ripeness of the cervix (27.5% vs. 37.2%, P < 0.05), shorter hospitalization durations (5.84 ± 1.79 vs. 6.17 ± 1.95, P < 0.05), and higher hospitalization costs (13627.39 ± 3227.56 vs. 10837.77 ± 3276.73, P < 0.001). No significant intergroup differences were observed in the rates of neonatal asphyxia and NICU admission. The most common motivation for elective IOL was concern regarding fetal distress or stillbirth. Parity ≥ 1 and a Bishop score ≥ 6 were protective factors against CS following IOL.

Conclusions: IOL at 40 weeks did not result in increased adverse outcomes compared to IOL at 41 weeks. Parturients with higher education and income were more likely to choose elective IOL. Parity ≥ 1 and a Bishop score ≥ 6 were protective factors against CS following IOL. These may provide a new option for clinical decision-making.

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
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
6.50%
发文量
845
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Pregnancy & Childbirth is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of pregnancy and childbirth. The journal welcomes submissions on the biomedical aspects of pregnancy, breastfeeding, labor, maternal health, maternity care, trends and sociological aspects of pregnancy and childbirth.
×
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