Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Poor maternal childbirth experience plays a role in family planning and subsequent pregnancies. The aim of this study was to compare childbirth experiences in induced and spontaneous labor and to investigate the factors influencing the childbirth experience. Methods This two-year cohort study included all women with term singleton pregnancies in cephalic presentation aiming for vaginal delivery at Helsinki University Hospital between January 2017 and December 2018. Maternal satisfaction in the childbirth experience was measured after delivery using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score. A low childbirth experience score was defined as VAS < 5. The characteristics and delivery outcomes of the study population were collected in the hospital database and analyzed by SPSS. Results A total of 18,396 deliveries were included in the study, of which 28.9% ( n  = 5322) were induced and 71.1% ( n  = 13 074) were of spontaneous onset. The total caesarean delivery rate was 9.3% ( n  = 1727). Overall, 4.5% ( n  = 819) of the women had a low childbirth experience VAS score. The women who underwent labor induction were less satisfied with their birth experience compared to women with spontaneous onset of labor [7.5% ( n  = 399) vs. 3.2% ( n  = 420); p  < 0.001]. Poor childbirth experience was associated with primiparity [OR 2.0 (95% CI 1.6–2.4)], labor induction [OR 1.6 (95% CI 1.4–1.9)], caesarean delivery [OR 4.5 (95% CI 3.7–5.5)], operative vaginal delivery [OR 3.3 (95% CI 2.7-4.0)], post-partum hemorrhage [OR 1.3 (95% CI 1.1–1.6)], and maternal infections [OR 1.7 (95% CI 1.3–2.4)]. Conclusions Poor childbirth experience was associated with labor induction, primiparity, operative delivery, and labor complications, such as post-partum hemorrhage and maternal infections. These results highlight the aspects of care for which patient experience may be improved by additional support and counselling.

A variety of oxytocin regimens are used for labor induction and augmentation. Considering the increasing rates of labor induction, it is important to assess the most optimal oxytocin regimen without compromising maternal and fetal safety. The aim of this study was to compare delivery outcomes of low-dose and high-dose oxytocin induction protocols. This retrospective cohort study of 487 women comparing low-dose oxytocin protocol (n = 280) and high-dose oxytocin protocol (n = 207) in labor induction following cervical ripening by balloon catheter was performed in Helsinki University Hospital after implementation of a new oxytocin induction protocol. The study included two six-month cohorts from 2016 and 2019. Women with vital singleton pregnancies ≥37 gestational weeks, cephalic presentation, and intact amniotic membranes were included. The primary outcome was the rate of vaginal delivery. The secondary outcomes were the rates of maternal and neonatal infections, postpartum hemorrhage, umbilical artery blood pH-value, admission to neonatal intensive care, and induction-to-delivery interval. Statistical analyses were performed by using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (Armonk, NY, USA). The rate of vaginal delivery was higher [69.9% (n = 144) vs. 47.9% (n = 134); p<0.004] and the rates of maternal and neonatal infection were lower during the new high-dose oxytocin protocol [maternal infections 13.6% (n = 28) vs. 22.1% (n = 62); p = 0.02 and neonatal infection 2.9% (n = 6) vs. 14.6% (n = 41); p<0.001, respectively]. The rates of post-partum hemorrhage, umbilical artery blood pH-value <7.05 or neonatal intensive care admissions did not differ between the cohorts. The median induction-to-delivery interval was shorter in the new protocol [32.0 h (IQR 18.5–42.7) vs. 37.9 h (IQR 27.8–52.8); p<0.001]. In conclusion, implementation of the new continuous high-dose oxytocin protocol resulted in higher rate of vaginal delivery and lower rate of maternal and neonatal infections. Our experience supports the use of high-dose continuous oxytocin induction regimen with a practice of stopping oxytocin once active labor is achieved, and a 15–18-hour maximum duration for oxytocin induction in the latent phase of labor following cervical ripening with a balloon catheter.

Background Women undergoing induction of labour (IOL) more often have poor childbirth experience compared to women with spontaneous onset of labour (SOL). For understanding and optimizing childbirth experience in IOL, we investigated the subjective maternal reasons and perceptions leading to poor childbirth experience in IOL compared to SOL, as well as the background factors and delivery outcomes associated with the poor experience. Methods Two-year retrospective cohort study included 836/19442 deliveries (4.3%) with poor childbirth experience in induced or spontaneous onset at term in Helsinki University Hospital. Poor childbirth experience occurred in 389/5290 (7.4%) cases of IOL and in 447/14152 (3.2%) of SOL. Childbirth experience was measured after delivery using Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score, with poor experience defined as VAS < 5. The primary outcome of the study were the maternal reasons for poor childbirth experience. The parameters were collected in the hospital database and statistical analyses were performed by using Mann–Whitney U-test and t-test. Results The subjective maternal reasons for poor childbirth experience were pain ( n  = 529, 63.3%), long labour ( n  = 209, 25.0%), lack of support by care givers ( n  = 108, 12.9%), and unplanned caesarean section (CS) ( n  = 104, 12.4%). The methods of labour analgesia were similar among the women who expressed pain as the main reason compared with those who didn’t. When comparing the reasons according to the onset of labour, IOL group more often reported unplanned CS (17.2% vs. 8.3%;  p  < 0.001) and lack of support by the care givers (15.4% vs. 10.7%;  p  = 0.04), while SOL group more often named pain (68.7% vs. 57.1%;  p  = 0.001) and rapid labour (6.9% vs. 2.8%;  p  = 0.007). In multivariable logistic regression model, IOL was associated with lower risk for pain compared to SOL (adjusted OR 0.6, 95%CI 0.5–0.8;  p  < 0.01). Primiparas more often reported long labour (29.3% vs. 14.3%;  p  < 0.001) and concern over own or baby’s wellbeing (5.7% vs. 2.1%;  p  = 0.03) compared to multiparas. Women who feared childbirth more often reported lack of support compared to women with no fear (22.6% vs. 10.7%;  p  < 0.001). Conclusion The main reasons for poor childbirth experience were pain, long labour, unplanned CS and the lack of support by care givers. The childbirth experience is complex and could be optimized by information, support and presence of care givers especially in induced labour.

Objective First birth and labor induction are risk factors for negative childbirth experiences. As labor inductions are increasing, research into this high-risk group's childbirth experiences is important. We aimed to investigate whether nulliparity or factors related to labor induction, labor, and delivery explain the association. Methods This was a prospective study of 711 women undergoing labor induction at Helsinki University Hospital, Finland, between January 1, 2019, and January 31, 2020. The participants answered the Childbirth Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) after delivery (response rate 69.4%). The patient characteristics and delivery outcomes were collected from patient records. We analyzed the results for nulliparous and parous women. Results The mean CEQ scores were 2.9 (SD 0.5) for nulliparous women (n = 408) and 3.2 (SD 0.5) for parous women (n = 303), on a scale of 1-4; higher scores represent more positive experiences. However, 7.3% of the women had negative childbirth experiences (8.8% nulliparous; 5.3% parous, p = 0.08). Negative experiences were associated with a cesarean section (OR 6.7, 95% CI 1.8-9.3, p < 0.001) and a hemorrhage [greater than or equal to] 1500 ml in vaginal delivery (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.1-7.5, p = 0.03). In the separate CEQ domains analyses, nulliparity was associated with negative experiences in the \"Own Capacity\" domain (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.0-2.4, p = 0.03). Cervical ripening, oxytocin use, and daytime delivery were associated with negative experiences in at least one domain, whereas epidural or spinal analgesia was regarded positively in two domains and negatively in one. Conclusions Nulliparous women undergoing labor induction risk negative childbirth experiences mainly due to labor and delivery-related factors, similar to parous women. Their perceptions of their capacity and preparedness for labor and delivery should be enhanced antenatally. An effective labor induction protocol promoting as high a rate of vaginal delivery as possible and preparedness to promptly respond to postpartum hemorrhage are key for avoiding negative childbirth experiences.

ObjectivesTo determine the association between the rate of labour induction and caesarean delivery.DesignMedical Birth Register-based study. We used data from the nationwide Medical Birth Register collecting data on delivery outcomes on all births from 22+0 weeks and/or birth weight of at least 500 g.SettingFinland.Participants663 024 live births in Finland from 2008 to 2019.Main outcome measuresThe rates of labour induction and caesarean delivery.ResultsThe rate of labour induction increased from 17.8% to 30.3%; p<0.001, during the study. The total caesarean delivery rate was 16.5% (n=109 178). An increase of approximately 0.5% in the caesarean delivery rate occurred during the study period. The rate of caesarean delivery following labour induction slightly decreased (15.41% vs 15.35%; p<0.001). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, induction of labour was associated with a reduced risk for caesarean delivery (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.74). The frequency of advanced maternal age (18.0% vs 23.5%; p<0.001), obesity (11.4% vs 15.1%; p<0.001) and gestational diabetes (9.8% vs 23.3%; p<0.001) increased during the study.ConclusionsThe 70% increase in the rate of labour induction in Finland has not led to a significant increase in the rate of caesarean delivery, which has remained one of the lowest in the world. Pregnant women in Finland are more frequently obese, older and diagnosed with gestational diabetes, which may partly explain the increase in the rate of labour induction.

Background Finland has the world’s highest incidence of 62.5/100000 of diabetes mellitus type 1 (DM1) with approximately 400 (1%) DM1 pregnancies annually. Pregnancies complicated by DM1 are accompanied with increased risk for perinatal morbidity and mortality. Timing and mode of delivery are based on the risk of complications, yet the data on labor induction is limited. The aim of this study was to compare delivery outcomes in planned vaginal (VD) and planned cesarean deliveries (CD) in late preterm and term DM1 pregnancies, and to evaluate the feasibility of labor induction. Materials and Methods Pregnant women with DM1, live singleton fetus in cephalic presentation ≥34 gestational weeks delivering in Helsinki University Hospital between January 1st 2017 and December 31st 2019 were included. The primary outcome were the rates of adverse maternal and perinatal outcome. The study population was classified according to the 1980-revised White’s classification. Statistical analyses were performed by IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows. Results Two hundred four women were included, 59.8% ( n  = 122) had planned VD. The rate of adverse maternal outcome was 27.5% ( n  = 56), similar between the planned modes of delivery and White classes. The rate of perinatal adverse outcome was 38.7% ( n  = 79), higher in planned CD (52.4% vs. 29.5%; p  = 0.001). The most common adverse perinatal event was respiratory distress (48.8% vs. 23.0%; p  <  0.001). The rate of adverse perinatal outcome was higher in White class D + Vascular compared to B + C (45.0% vs. 25.0%, OR after adjustment by gestational age 2.34 [95% CI 1.20–4.50]; p  = 0.01). The total rate of CD was 63.7% ( n  = 130), and 39.3% ( n  = 48) in planned VD. Women with White class D + Vascular more often had emergency CD compared to White Class B + C (48.6% vs. 25.0%; p  = 0.009). The rate of labor induction was 51%, being 85.2% in planned VD. The rate of VD in induced labor was 58.7% ( n  = 61) and the rate of failed induction was 14.1% ( n  = 15). Conclusion Planned VD was associated with lower rate of adverse perinatal outcome compared to planned CS, with no difference in the rates of adverse maternal outcome. Induction of labor may be feasible option but should be carefully considered in this high-risk population.

Background The rates of cesarean section (CS) are increasing worldwide leading to an increased risk for maternal and neonatal complications in the subsequent pregnancy and labor. Previous studies have demonstrated that successful trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC) is associated with the least maternal morbidity, but the risks of unsuccessful TOLAC exceed the risks of scheduled repeat CS. However, prediction of successful TOLAC is difficult, and only limited data on TOLAC in women with previous failed labor induction or labor dystocia exists. Our aim was to evaluate the success of TOLAC in women with a history of failed labor induction or labor dystocia, to compare the delivery outcomes according to stage of labor at time of previous CS, and to assess the risk factors for recurrent failed labor induction or labor dystocia. Methods This retrospective cohort study of 660 women with a prior CS for failed labor induction or labor dystocia undergoing TOLAC was carried out in Helsinki University Hospital, Finland, between 2013 and 2015. Data on the study population was obtained from the hospital database and analyzed using SPSS. Results The rate of vaginal delivery was 72.9% and the rate of repeat CS for failed induction or labor dystocia was 17.7%. The rate of successful TOLAC was 75.6% in women with a history of labor arrest in the first stage of labor, 73.1% in women with a history of labor arrest in the second stage of labor, and 59.0% in women with previous failed induction. The adjusted risk factors for recurrent failed induction or labor dystocia were maternal height < 160 cm (OR 1.9 95% CI 1.1–3.1), no prior vaginal delivery (OR 8.3 95% CI 3.5–19.8), type 1 or gestational diabetes (OR 1.8 95% CI 1.0–3.0), IOL for suspected non-diabetic fetal macrosomia (OR 10.8 95% CI 2.1–55.9) and birthweight ≥4500 g (OR 3.3 95% CI 1.3–7.9). Conclusions TOLAC is a feasible option to scheduled repeat CS in women with a history of failed induction or labor dystocia. However, women with no previous vaginal delivery, maternal height < 160 cm, diabetes or suspected neonatal macrosomia (≥4500 g) may be at increased risk for failed TOLAC.

ObjectiveFirst birth and labor induction are risk factors for negative childbirth experiences. As labor inductions are increasing, research into this high-risk group's childbirth experiences is important. We aimed to investigate whether nulliparity or factors related to labor induction, labor, and delivery explain the association.MethodsThis was a prospective study of 711 women undergoing labor induction at Helsinki University Hospital, Finland, between January 1, 2019, and January 31, 2020. The participants answered the Childbirth Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) after delivery (response rate 69.4%). The patient characteristics and delivery outcomes were collected from patient records. We analyzed the results for nulliparous and parous women.ResultsThe mean CEQ scores were 2.9 (SD 0.5) for nulliparous women (n = 408) and 3.2 (SD 0.5) for parous women (n = 303), on a scale of 1-4; higher scores represent more positive experiences. However, 7.3% of the women had negative childbirth experiences (8.8% nulliparous; 5.3% parous, p = 0.08). Negative experiences were associated with a cesarean section (OR 6.7, 95% CI 1.8-9.3, p < 0.001) and a hemorrhage ≥ 1500 ml in vaginal delivery (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.1-7.5, p = 0.03). In the separate CEQ domains analyses, nulliparity was associated with negative experiences in the \"Own Capacity\" domain (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.0-2.4, p = 0.03). Cervical ripening, oxytocin use, and daytime delivery were associated with negative experiences in at least one domain, whereas epidural or spinal analgesia was regarded positively in two domains and negatively in one.ConclusionsNulliparous women undergoing labor induction risk negative childbirth experiences mainly due to labor and delivery-related factors, similar to parous women. Their perceptions of their capacity and preparedness for labor and delivery should be enhanced antenatally. An effective labor induction protocol promoting as high a rate of vaginal delivery as possible and preparedness to promptly respond to postpartum hemorrhage are key for avoiding negative childbirth experiences.

First birth and labor induction are risk factors for negative childbirth experiences. As labor inductions are increasing, research into this high-risk group's childbirth experiences is important. We aimed to investigate whether nulliparity or factors related to labor induction, labor, and delivery explain the association. This was a prospective study of 711 women undergoing labor induction at Helsinki University Hospital, Finland, between January 1, 2019, and January 31, 2020. The participants answered the Childbirth Experience Questionnaire (CEQ) after delivery (response rate 69.4%). The patient characteristics and delivery outcomes were collected from patient records. We analyzed the results for nulliparous and parous women. The mean CEQ scores were 2.9 (SD 0.5) for nulliparous women (n = 408) and 3.2 (SD 0.5) for parous women (n = 303), on a scale of 1-4; higher scores represent more positive experiences. However, 7.3% of the women had negative childbirth experiences (8.8% nulliparous; 5.3% parous, p = 0.08). Negative experiences were associated with a cesarean section (OR 6.7, 95% CI 1.8-9.3, p < 0.001) and a hemorrhage [greater than or equal to] 1500 ml in vaginal delivery (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.1-7.5, p = 0.03). In the separate CEQ domains analyses, nulliparity was associated with negative experiences in the \"Own Capacity\" domain (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.0-2.4, p = 0.03). Cervical ripening, oxytocin use, and daytime delivery were associated with negative experiences in at least one domain, whereas epidural or spinal analgesia was regarded positively in two domains and negatively in one. Nulliparous women undergoing labor induction risk negative childbirth experiences mainly due to labor and delivery-related factors, similar to parous women. Their perceptions of their capacity and preparedness for labor and delivery should be enhanced antenatally. An effective labor induction protocol promoting as high a rate of vaginal delivery as possible and preparedness to promptly respond to postpartum hemorrhage are key for avoiding negative childbirth experiences.

IntroductionInduction of labour (IOL) is a commonly performed obstetric intervention, particularly when delivery is deemed more beneficial than continuing the pregnancy due to maternal or fetal indications. When the cervix is unfavourable for delivery, cervical ripening is performed prior to IOL. A wide variety of mechanical, pharmacological and combination methods are used, but the optimal approach balancing efficacy, safety and patient experience remains uncertain. Conventional aggregate data (AD) meta-analyses lack individual-level data, limiting exploration of patient-level factors for personalised medicine and do not address concerns about the trustworthiness of data presented in peer-reviewed randomised controlled trials (RCTs). This protocol describes an individual participant data (IPD) network meta-analysis (NMA) designed to evaluate and rank cervical ripening methods for IOL using only high quality, trustworthy data.Methods and analysisWe will identify eligible parallel-group RCTs enrolling pregnant women with a singleton, cephalic fetus at ≥34 weeks’ gestation requiring cervical ripening, through comprehensive searches of Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, Scopus, Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Register, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, clinicaltrials.gov and reference lists of prior reviews. The interventions we consider will be selected via Delphi consensus with international clinical experts. Eligible trial investigators will be invited to contribute de-identified IPD; AD will be used if IPD is unavailable. Trials will be assessed for trustworthiness using the Trustworthiness in RAndomised Clinical Trials checklist and the IPD Integrity Tool, with only eligible studies included in the primary analysis. All statistical analyses will follow a pre-specified statistical analysis plan (SAP) finalised before any analyses are conducted. A two-stage, contrast-based, frequentist IPD-NMA will compare cervical ripening methods for three co-primary outcomes: vaginal birth, composite adverse perinatal outcomes and composite adverse maternal outcomes. Subgroup analyses will assess effect modifiers (eg, parity, age and previous caesarean), with treatment rankings presented using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve and rank-heat plots. Sensitivity analyses will examine the impact of bias, missing data and population criteria.Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (No. 48189). IPD will be de-identified and securely transferred for storage on a Monash University-hosted shared network drive. Findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications, conference abstracts and the Cervical Ripening for Induction of Labour Collaborative Evidence Network Meta-Analysis (CIRCLE-NMA) website (https://circlenma.com). Patient and public involvement will guide the communication and interpretation of results.PROSPERO registration numberCRD420251077464.