METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This randomised controlled trial will involve an intervention group receiving BRM and standard labour care, and a control group receiving only standard labour care. Primigravidae of 26-34 weeks of gestation without chronic diseases or pregnancy-related complications will be recruited from antenatal clinics. Eligible and consenting patients will be randomly allocated to the intervention or the control group stratified by intramuscular pethidine use. The BRM intervention will be delivered by a trained massage therapist. The primary outcomes of labour pain and anxiety will be measured during and after uterine contractions at baseline (cervical dilatation 6 cm) and post BRM hourly for 2 hours. The secondary outcomes include maternal stress hormone (adrenocorticotropic hormone, cortisol and oxytocin) levels, maternal vital signs (V/S), fetal heart rate, labour duration, Apgar scores and maternal satisfaction. The sample size is estimated based on the between-group difference of 0.6 in anxiety scores, 95% power and 5% α error, which yields a required sample size of 154 (77 in each group) accounting for a 20% attrition rate. The between-group and within-group outcome measures will be examined with mixed-effect regression models, time series analyses and paired t-test or equivalent non-parametric tests, respectively.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the Ethical Committee for Research Involving Human Subjects of the Ministry of Health in the Saudi Arabia (H-02-K-076-0319-109) on 14 April 2019, and from the Ethics Committee for Research Involving Human Subjects (JKEUPM) Universiti Putra Malaysia on 23 October 2019, reference number: JKEUPM-2019-169. Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. Results from this trial will be presented at regional, national and international conferences and published in indexed journals.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN87414969, registered 3 May 2019.
STUDY DESIGN: Participants were randomized to intravenous bolus injection of 100mcg carbetocin or 10IU oxytocin after cesarean delivery of the baby. The primary outcome is any additional uterotonic which may be administered by the blinded provider for perceived inadequate uterine tone with or without hemorrhage in the first 24hours after delivery. Secondary outcomes include operating time, perioperative blood loss, change in hemoglobin and hematocrit levels, blood transfusion and reoperation for postpartum hemorrhage.
RESULTS: Additional uterotonic rates were 107/276 (38.8%) vs. 155/271 (57.2%) [RR 0.68 95% CI 0.57-0.81 p<0.001; NNTb 6 95% CI 3.8-9.8], mean operating time 45.9±16.0 vs. 44.5±13.1minutes p=0.26, mean blood loss 458±258 vs. 446±281ml p=0.6, severe postpartum hemorrhage (≥1000ml) rates 15/276 (5.4%) vs. 10/271 (3.7%) p=0.33 and blood transfusion rates 6/276 (2.2%) vs. 10/271 (3.7%); p=0.30 for carbetocin and oxytocin arms respectively. There was only one case of re-operation (oxytocin arm). In the cases that needed additional uterotonic 98% (257/262) was started intraoperatively and in 89% (234/262) the only additional uterotonic administered was an oxytocin infusion over 6hours.
CONCLUSION: Fewer women in the carbetocin arm needed additional uterotonics but perioperative blood loss, severe postpartum hemorrhage, blood transfusion and operating time were not different.
METHODS: A randomized trial was conducted from September 2020 to March 2021. A total of 140 term nulliparas (70 early amniotomy, 70 delayed amniotomy) with Foley catheter-ripened cervices (dilatation ≥3 cm achieved), singleton fetus, cephalic presentation with intact membranes, and reassuring fetal heart rate tracing were recruited. Women were randomized to immediate titrated intravenous oxytocin infusion and early amniotomy or delayed amniotomy (after 4 h of oxytocin). The primary outcome was intervention (oxytocin)-to-delivery interval (h).
RESULTS: Intervention-to-delivery intervals (h) were mean ± standard deviation 9.0 ± 3.6 versus 10.6 ± 3.5 h (mean difference of 1.4 h) (P = 0.004) for the early versus delayed amniotomy arms, respectively. Birth rates at 6 h after oxytocin infusion were 19 of 70 (27.1%) versus 8 of 70 (11.4%) (relative risk, 2.38 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.11-5.06]; number needed to treat: 7 [95% CI, 3.5-34.4]) (P = 0.03), cesarean delivery rates were 29 of 70 (41.4%) versus 33 of 70 (47.1%) (relative risk, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.61-1.28) (P = 0.50), and maternal satisfaction on birth process were a median of 7 (interquartile range, 7-8) versus 7 (interquartile range, 7-8) (P = 0.40) for the early versus delayed amniotomy arms, respectively.
CONCLUSION: In term nulliparas with cervices ripened by Foley catheter, immediate oxytocin and early amniotomy compared with a planned 4-h delay to amniotomy shortened the intervention-to-delivery interval but did not significantly reduce the cesarean delivery rate.
METHODS: This randomized trial was conducted in Malaysia in 232 term multiparous women with balloon catheter-ripened cervixes (dilatation ≥3 cm), singleton fetus, cephalic presentation with intact membranes, and reassuring fetal heart rate tracing. They were randomized to immediate titrated intravenous oxytocin infusion and early amniotomy (116) or delayed amniotomy after 4 h of oxytocin (116). Primary outcome was intervention (oxytocin initiation)-to-delivery interval.
RESULTS: Oxytocin-to-delivery intervals were a median of 4.99 h (interquartile range [IQR], 3.21-7.82 h) versus 6.23 h (IQR, 4.50-8.45 h) (P oxytocin infusion were 40 of 116 (35%) versus 22 of 116 (19%) (relative risk [RR], 1.82 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.16-2.86], P = 0.011) and 77 of 116 (66%) versus 54 of 116 (47%) (RR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.13-1.80], P = 0.003) for the early versus delayed amniotomy arms, respectively. Maternal satisfaction on birth process were 7 (IQR, 6-8) versus 7 (IQR, 7-8) (P = 0.006), uterine hyperstimulation rates were 10 of 116 (9%) versus 14 of 116 (12%) (RR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.33-1.54]) (P = 0.519), and Cesarean delivery rates were 17 of 116 (15%) versus 19 of 116 (16%) (RR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.49-1.63], P = 0.856) for the early versus delayed amniotomy arms, respectively.
CONCLUSION: In multiparas at term following cervical ripening by Foley catheter, immediate oxytocin and early amniotomy compared with a scheduled 4-h delay to amniotomy shortens the interval to birth and decreases uterine hyperactivity in labor but lowers maternal satisfaction. The cesarean delivery rate is not significantly reduced.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) on September 29, 2020, with trial identification number: ISRCTN87066007 (https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN87066007). The first participant was recruited on September 29, 2020, after ISRCTN registry confirmation was received.
METHODS: This randomized trial was conducted in a tertiary university hospital in Malaysia from September 2020 to February 2022. A total of 330 nulliparous women at term with unripe cervices (Bishop score ≤5), singleton viable fetus in cephalic presentation, reassuring preinduction fetal heart rate tracing and intact membranes who underwent planned outpatient Foley catheter induction of labor (IOL) were included. Women were randomized to expectant or immediate return to hospital if the Foley was spontaneously expelled at home before their scheduled hospital admission the following day. Primary outcomes were amniotomy-titrated oxytocin infusion to delivery interval and maternal satisfaction on the induction process (assessed by 0-10 visual numerical rating scale [VNRS]).
RESULTS: Amniotomy-titrated oxytocin infusion to delivery interval was 8.7 ± 4.1 versus 8.9 ± 3.9 h, P = 0.605 (mean difference - 0.228 95% CI: -1.1 to +0.6 h) and maternal satisfaction VNRS score was median (interquartile range) 8 (7-9) versus 8 (7-9), P = 0.782. Early return to hospital rates were 37/165 (22.4%) versus 72/165 (43.6%), RR 0.51 (95% CI: 0.37-0.72), P ≤ 0.001, Cesarean delivery rates were 80/165 (48.5%) versus 80/165 (48.5%), RR 1.00 (95% CI: 0.80-1.25), P = 1.00 and duration of hospital stay was 54.4 ± 22.9 versus 56.7 ± 22.8 h, P = 0.364 for the expectant versus immediate return groups respectively.
CONCLUSION: In outpatient Foley catheter IOL, expectant compared to immediate return to hospital following Foley dislodgement results in similarly high maternal satisfaction. The amniotomy-titrated oxytocin to delivery duration is non-inferior with expectant management.
DESIGN: randomised controlled trial of nulliparous women with spontaneous labour at term.
SETTING: labour suite of a university teaching hospital in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
PARTICIPANTS: 240 women were included (120 randomised into two arms).
INTERVENTIONS: the randomisation sequence was generated using a computer randomisation program in two blocks: oxytocin infused early following amniotomy; and oxytocin infused 2 h after amniotomy.
MEASUREMENTS AND FINDINGS: labour duration, mode of delivery, oxytocin dosage used, uterine hyperstimulation, postpartum haemorrhage, Apgar score and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit were recorded. No differences in vaginal delivery rate (62.9% vs 70.9%; p = 0.248) and second-stage labour were found between the early and delayed oxytocin infusion groups (21.2 ± 18.3 min vs 25.5 ± 19.9 min; p = 0.220). The mean interval from amniotomy to vaginal delivery was significantly shorter for the early group (5.8 ± 1.7 h vs 7.0 ± 1.9 h; p = 0.001), and more women in the early group delivered during/before the planned review at 4 h after amniotomy (53.6% vs 10.6%; p<0.001). Maximum oxytocin usage was lower in the early group (5.6 ± 4.4 mL/hour vs 6.8 ± 5.3 mL/hour; p = 0.104).
KEY CONCLUSIONS: early oxytocin augmentation following amniotomy could be employed in low-risk primigravida, given that it is associated with a shorter labour duration without jeopardising maternal or neonatal outcomes.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: low-risk primigravida benefit from early oxytocin infusion following amniotomy, and this can be offered as an additional practice in labour room care.
METHODS: : Nulliparas with uncomplicated PROM at term, a Bishop score less than or equal to 6, and who required labor induction were recruited for a double-blind randomized trial. Participants were randomly assigned to 3-mg dinoprostone pessary and oxytocin infusion or placebo and oxytocin infusion. A cardiotocogram was performed before induction and maintained to delivery. Dinoprostone pessary or placebo was placed in the posterior vaginal fornix. Oxytocin intravenous infusion was commenced at 2 milliunits/min and doubled every 30 minutes to a maximum of 32 milliunits/min. Oxytocin infusion rate was titrated to achieve four contractions every 10 minutes. Primary outcomes were vaginal delivery within 12 hours and maternal satisfaction with the birth process using a visual analog scale (VAS) from 0 to 10 (higher score, greater satisfaction).
RESULTS: : One hundred fourteen women were available for analysis. Vaginal delivery rates within 12 hours were 25 of 57 (43.9%) for concurrent treatment compared with 27/57 (47.4%) (relative risk 0.9, 95% confidence interval 0.6-1.4, P=.85) for oxytocin only; median VAS was 8 (interquartile range [IQR] 2) compared with 8 (IQR 2), P=.38. Uterine hyperstimulation was 14% compared with 5.3%, P=.20; overall vaginal delivery rates were 59.6% compared with 64.9%, P=.70; and induction to vaginal delivery interval 9.7 hours compared with 9.4 hours P=.75 for concurrent treatment compared with oxytocin, respectively. There was no significant difference for any other outcome.
CONCLUSION: : Concurrent vaginal dinoprostone and intravenous oxytocin for labor induction of term PROM did not expedite delivery or improve patient satisfaction.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: : Current Controlled Trials, www.controlled-trials.com, ISRCTN74376345
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: : I.
METHODS: Parous women with favorable cervixes after amniotomy for labor induction were randomized to immediate titrated oxytocin or placebo intravenous infusion in a double-blind noninferiority trial. After 4 hours, study infusions were stopped, the women were assessed, and open-label oxytocin was started if required. Maternal satisfaction with the birth process was assessed with a 10-point visual numerical rating scale (lower score, greater satisfaction).
RESULTS: Vaginal delivery rates at 12 hours were 91 of 96 (94.8%) compared with 91 of 94 (96.8%) (relative risk 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92-1.04, P=.72), and maternal satisfaction on a visual numerical rating scale (median [interquartile range]) was 3 [3-4] compared with 3 [3-5], P=.36 for immediate compared with delayed arm, respectively). Cesarean delivery, maternal fever, postpartum hemorrhage, uterine hyperactivity, and adverse neonatal outcome rates were similar between arms. The immediate oxytocin arm had a shorter amniotomy-to-delivery interval of 5.3±3.1 compared with 6.9±2.9 hours (Poxytocin infusion was avoided by 35.6%.
CONCLUSIONS: Immediate or delayed oxytocin infusions are reasonable options after amniotomy for labor induction in parous women with favorable cervixes. The choice should take into account local resources and the woman's wish.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Register, http://isrctn.org, ISRCTN51476259.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.