Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 10, 2025
External Cephalic Version: Is it an Effective and Safe Procedure?
Published on: June 6, 2020
Cesarean delivery after non-medically indicated induction of labor: A population-based study using different
Christoph Zenzmaier1, Bernhard Pfeifer2,3, Hermann Leitner2
1University of Applied Sciences Tyrol, Innsbruck, Austria.
Introduction:
Most observational studies found that non-medically indicated induction of labor (IOL) is not associated with an increased risk of cesarean delivery compared with expectant management, defined as all births at a later gestation. However, given the higher rate of cesarean delivery at late term, this definition of the expectant management group might bias the results of observational studies in favor of IOL at early or full term when estimating the risk of short-term (eg up to 1 week) expectant management.
Material And Methods:
We conducted a retrospective cohort study including 447 066 singleton term and post-term hospital births that occurred in Austria between 2008 and 2016. Multivariate logistic regression was used to test the association of IOL and cesarean delivery at each week of gestation from 37-41. Expectant management was either defined as all births at "next week or beyond" or "at next week".
Results:
Non-medically indicated IOL was associated with increased odds for cesarean delivery at 37 and 38 weeks, and reduced odds at 40 and 41 weeks. At 39 weeks, IOL resulted in comparable cesarean rates compared with expectant management defined as "next week or beyond" (17.2% vs 16.2%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86-1.00; P = .059). However, when defined as births "at the next week", expectant management was associated with significantly reduced odds for cesarean delivery (13.6%; adjusted OR 0.76; 95% CI 0.70-0.82; P < .001). Comparison of the cesarean delivery rates for the two definitions of expectant management showed that the "next week and beyond" model underestimates the benefit of short-term expectant management by up to 1 week, particularly for IOL at weeks 38 and 39.
Conclusions:
Our findings demonstrate that the definition of the expectant management group has a significant impact when analyzing the outcome of IOL in retrospective cohort studies. Non-medically indicated IOL is not an all-or-none choice between "elective" induction and indefinite expectant management. Thus, to define the control group as all births at the next week could be useful for clinical decision-making, as it allows to estimate the risks of expectant management until the next appointment compared with immediate IOL.
More Related Videos
05:36Author Spotlight: Inducing Pseudopregnancy in Female Mice Without the Need for Vasectomized Males Prior to Non-Surgical Embryo Transfer or Artificial Insemination
Published on: July 7, 2023
05:46Introduction of Intracapsular Rotary-cut Procedures IRCP: A Modified Hysteromyomectomy Procedures Facilitating Fertility Preservation
Published on: January 17, 2019
Related Concept Videos
01:15Methods of Documentation VI: Case Management Model
For example, a patient with a chronic...
01:29Local Anesthetics: Clinical Application as Epidural Anesthesia
Since epidural anesthetics can be infused through an epidural catheter, all types of drugs, including short-acting ones, can be administered. Chloroprocaine and lidocaine are examples of short and long-duration anesthetics, respectively. Bupivacaine...
01:19Mitral Valve Prolapse III: Nursing Management
01:26Methods Of Healthcare Delivery System
Managed Care System:
The managed care system is designed to control the cost while maintaining the quality of care. The patient's care from admission to discharge is planned by the primary care provider or the case manager, also known as the gatekeeper. In a managed care system, the number of care providers is...
01:23Methods of Documentation V: CBE
In CBE, healthcare professionals establish predefined standards of practice that define what constitutes...
01:29Mechanical Ventilation I: Indication and Settings