Lamaze.org > Online Community > Ask an Expert

 

home | contact us | site map | Login
Ask Henci

Henci GoerFind out what other moms-to-be are asking.  Join in the discussion with Henci Goer, an expert in obstetric research. If you would like to contact Henci outside of the Ask Henci forum, send an email to Goersitemail@aol.com.

If you would like your own username and password for the Ask Henci forum, click here to submit your request.


Inducing labor after rupture of membranes before onset of labor
Last Post 28 Jun 2008 03:12 AM by Henci Goer, BA. 2 Replies.
AddThis - Bookmarking and Sharing Button Printer Friendly
Sort:
PrevPrev NextNext
Author Messages
Melissa (guest)
Posts:993
Avatar


--
26 Jun 2008 05:11 PM QuoteQuote ReplyReply

I have a student (I am a CBE) who met with a doctor who said if her water broke before the onset of labor and if she had no contractions after an HOUR, he would induce.

Can you please direct me toward some literature that I can share with her that goes against that doctor's suggestion? I thought 12 hours was a very conservative wait, so one hour seems absurd to me. This doctor is a maternal-fetal specialist.

maria (guest)
Posts:993
Avatar


--
27 Jun 2008 06:29 AM QuoteQuote ReplyReply
Henci posted this a while ago
http://www.lamaze.org/NormalBirthForum/tabid/363/forumid/11/postid/1093/view/topic/Default.aspx

There may be other threads here with more information, but this would be sufficient for me

maria.
Henci Goer, BAUser is Offline
Ask Henci
Ask Henci
Posts:705
Avatar


--
28 Jun 2008 03:12 AM QuoteQuote ReplyReply
Posted By n/a on 06/26/2008 12:11 PM

I have a student (I am a CBE) who met with a doctor who said if her water broke before the onset of labor and if she had no contractions after an HOUR, he would induce.

Can you please direct me toward some literature that I can share with her that goes against that doctor's suggestion? I thought 12 hours was a very conservative wait, so one hour seems absurd to me. This doctor is a maternal-fetal specialist.

 

Here is what the recent Cochrane systematic review had to say on the subject along with my comments. I'm excerpting from slides presented at Lamaze International's 2007 annual conference. Amy Romano and I teamed up to do the annual research update.

-- Henci

Dare, M. R., Middleton, P., Crowther, C. A., Flenady, V. J., & Varatharaju, B. (2006). Planned early birth versus expectant management (waiting) for prelabour rupture of membranes at term (37 weeks or more). Cochrane Database Syst Rev(1), CD005302.

         Review: Systematic review of 12 trials of planned induction vs. expectant management totaling 6800 women (Hannah [1996] contributed 74% of them)

         Results: Induction compared with expectant management

        no difference in neonatal infections (9 trials, N = 6400)

        relative risk of admission to NICU: 0.72 (5 trials, N = 5700) BUT

         reviewers state may be differences in hospital policy

        relative risk of chorioamnionitis: 0.74 (9 trials, N = 6600) BUT

         chorioamnionitis defined as fever before or during labor

         absolute difference [calculated from data] 3.1%

         chorioamnionitis may be associated with number of vaginal exams, and many women had vaginal exams (Seaward, 1997)

         chorioamnionitis is minor

        relative risk of endometritis: 0.30 (4 trials, N = 445) BUT

         absolute difference [calculated from review data] 6.0%

         Weakness: All women managed conventionally in hospitals therefore do not know what results would be with optimal care.

         Conclusion: “Since planned and expectant management may not be very different, women need to have appropriate information to make informed choices. (p. 2)” 



 



Active Forums 4.1
Read the Forum Terms & Conditions

Copyright · All Rights Reserved · 2025 M Street, NW, Suite 800 · Washington, D.C. 20036-3309
800/368-4404 · 202/367-1128 · 202/367-2128 (fax)

Connect with Us

Privacy Statement · Terms of Use