Disruption of physiological labour : a population register-based study among nulliparous women at term

Objectives: Current labour practices have seen an acceleration in interventions to either initiate, monitor, accelerate, or terminate the physiological process of pregnancy and childbirth. This study aimed to describe and analyse the use of interventions in childbirth in Denmark over almost two decades (2000–2017). We also examined the extent to which contemporary care adheres to current international recommendations towards restricted use of interventions. Study design: A national retrospective Danish register-based cohort study including all nulliparous women with term births with singleton pregnancy and a foetus in cephalic between the years 2000 and 2017 (n = 380,326 births). Multivariate regression analyses with adjustment for change in population were performed. Main outcome measures: Induction of labour, epidural analgesia, and augmentation of labour. Results: Between 2000/2001 and 2016/2017, the prevalence increased for induction of labour from 5.1% to 22.8%, AOR 4.84, 95% CI [4.61–5.10], epidural analgesia from 10.5% to 34.3% (AOR 4.10, 95% CI [3.95–4.26]), and augmentation of labour decreased slightly from 40.1% to 39.3% (AOR 0.84, 95% CI [0.81–0.86]). Having more than one of the three mentioned interventions increased from 12.8% in to 30.9%. Conclusions: The number of interventions increased during the study period as well as the number of interventions in each woman. As interventions may interfere in physiological labour and carry the risk of potential short- and long-term consequences, the findings call for a careful re-evaluation of contemporary maternity care with a “first, do no harm” perspective

Routine induction in late-term pregnancies : follow-up of a Danish induction of labour paradigm

Objectives For many years, routine elective induction of labour at gestational week (GW) 42+0 has been recommended in Denmark. In 2011, a more proactive protocol was introduced aimed at reducing stillbirths, and practice changed into earlier routine induction, i.e. between 41+3 and 41+5 GW. The present study evaluates a national change in induction of labour regime. The trend of maternal and neonatal consequences are monitored in the preintervention period (2000-2010) compared with the postintervention period (2012-2016). Design A national retrospective register-based cohort study. Setting Denmark. Participants All births in Denmark 41+3 to 45+0 GWs between 2000 and 2016 (N = 152 887). Outcome measures Primary outcomes: stillbirths, perinatal death, and low Apgar scores. Additional outcomes: birth interventions and maternal outcomes. Results For the primary outcomes, no differences in stillbirths, perinatal death, and low Apgar scores were found comparing the preintervention and postintervention period. Of additional outcomes, the trend changed significantly postintervention concerning use of augmentation of labour, epidural analgesia, induction of labour and uterine rupture (all p<0.05). There was no significant change in the trend for caesarean section and instrumental birth. Most notable for clinical practice was the increase in induction of labour from 41% to 65% (p<0.01) at 41+3 weeks during 2011 as well as the rare occurrence of uterine ruptures (from 2.6 to 4.2 per thousand, p<0.02). Conclusions Evaluation of a more proactive regimen recommending induction of labour from GW 41+3 compared with 42+0 using national register data found no differences in neonatal outcomes including stillbirth. The number of women with induced labour increased significantly. © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ

Variations in childbirth interventions in high-income countries: protocol for a multinational cross-sectional study

Introduction There are growing concerns about the increase in rates of commonly used childbirth interventions. When indicated, childbirth interventions are crucial for preventing maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality, but their routine use in healthy women and children leads to avoidable maternal and neonatal harm. Establishing ideal rates of interventions can be challenging. This study aims to describe the range of variations in the use of commonly used childbirth interventions in high-income countries around the world, and in outcomes in nulliparous and multiparous women. Methods and analysis This multinational cross-sectional study will use data from births in 2013 with national population data or representative samples of the population of pregnant women in high-income countries. Data from women who gave birth to a single child from 37 weeks gestation onwards will be included and the results will be presented for nulliparous and multiparous women separately. Anonymised individual level data will be analysed. Primary outcomes are rates of commonly used childbirth interventions, including induction and/or augmentation of labour, intrapartum antibiotics, epidural and pharmacological pain relief, episiotomy in vaginal births, instrument-assisted birth (vacuum or forceps), caesarean section and use of oxytocin postpartum. Secondary outcomes are maternal and perinatal mortality, Apgar score below 7 at 5 min, postpartum haemorrhage and obstetric anal sphincter injury. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses will be conducted to investigate variations among countries, adjusted for maternal age, body mass index, gestational weight gain, ethnic background, socioeconomic status and infant birth weight. The overall mean rates will be considered as a reference category, weighted for the size of the study population per country. Ethics and dissemination The Medical Ethics Review Committee of VU University Medical Center Amsterdam confirmed that an official approval of this study was not required. Results will be disseminated at national and international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.The study was developed during a meeting with COST-members (European Cooperation in Science and Technology). These meetings are funded by the COST Action IS1405 ‘BIRTH’ (European Cooperation in Science and Technology). There is no other external funding for this study.Peer Reviewe

Correction : variations in childbirth interventions in high-income countries : protocol for a multinational cross-sectional study

Original article can be fount at: https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/58714Correction issued for the article Variations in childbirth interventions in highincome countries: protocol for a multinational cross-sectional study (10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017993)peer-reviewe

Reanalysis 5.3 excluding Matonhodze

<p>Cochrane comments and criticism</p

Matonhodze reuse of participants

<p>Cochrane comment and criticism</p

Cochrane oral misoprostol analysis 5.3

<p>Cochrane comment and criticism</p

An Unreported Uterine Rupture in an Unscarred Uterus After Induced Labor With 25 μg Misoprostol Vaginally

Uterine rupture without a former history of cesarean delivery or uterine scarring is an exceedingly rare complication in pregnancy and labor. Misoprostol is widely used to induce labor but there is a lack of knowledge about serious adverse effects. It is especially challenging to collect reports on side effects because misoprostol is not a registered drug. We report a case of a woman induced by one dose 25 μg misoprostol vaginally. Her pregnancy was uncomplicated and she had an unscarred uterus. Her labor progressed rapidly and she experienced hyperstimulation, meconium stained amniotic fluid, uterine rupture, and excessive blood loss of approximately 14 l. The child survived but is diagnosed with cerebral palsy. The case was never reported as an adverse event. This case questions the safety of misoprostol even in low dosage. It also underlines the need to report side effects to national reporting systems

Quality assessment of patient leaflets on misoprostol-induced labour:does written information adhere to international standards for patient involvement and informed consent?

OBJECTIVES: The need for thorough patient information is increasing as maternity care becomes more medicalised. The aim was to assess the quality of written patient information on labour induction. In most Danish hospitals, misoprostol is the first-choice drug for induction in low-risk pregnancies. Misoprostol has been associated with adverse side effects and severe outcomes for mother and child and is not registered for obstetric use in Denmark. SETTING: Secondary care hospitals in Denmark. DATA: Patient information leaflets from all hospitals that used misoprostol as an induction agent by June 2015 (N=13). DESIGN: Patient leaflets were evaluated according to a validated scoring tool (International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument, IPDAS), core elements in the Danish Health Act, and items regarding off-label use and non-registered medication. Two of the authors scored all leaflets independently. OUTCOME MEASURES: Women's involvement in decision-making, information on benefits and harms associated with the treatment, other justifiable treatment options, and non-registered treatment. RESULTS: Generally, the hospitals scored low on the IPDAS checklist. No hospitals encouraged women to consider their preferences. Information on side effects and adverse outcomes was poorly covered and varied substantially between hospitals. Few hospitals informed about precautions regarding outpatient inductions, and none informed about the lack of evidence on the safety of this procedure. None informed that misoprostol is not registered for induction or explained the meaning of off-label use or use of non-registered medication. Elements such as interprofessional consensus, long-term experience, and health authorities' approval were used to add credibility to the use of misoprostol. CONCLUSIONS: Central criteria for patient involvement and informed consent were not met, and the patient leaflets did not inform according to current evidence on misoprostol-induced labour. Our findings indicate that patients receive very different, sometimes contradictory, information with potential ethical implications. Concerns should be given to outpatient inductions, where precise written information is of particular importance