Inducing labor after rupture of membranes before onset of labor

Archived User

Inducing labor after rupture of membranes before onset of labor

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.

Archived User

RE: Inducing labor after rupture of membranes before onset of labor
(in response to Archived User)
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

RE: Inducing labor after rupture of membranes before onset of labor
(in response to Archived User)
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)” 



 

Forum Disclaimer

Please note that this Forum is intended to help women make informed decisions about their care. The content is not a substitute for medical advice.