Women's lived experiences of induction of labour in late- and post-term pregnancy within the Swedish post-term induction study - a phenomenological study.

PURPOSE: There is a trend worldwide to induce pregnant women earlier. However, few studies have focused on women's experiences. The aim was to gain a deeper understanding of women's lived experiences of induction of labour in late- and post-term pregnancy. METHODS: Phenomenology with a reflective lifeworld approach was chosen as the method. Twelve women participating in a larger study in which women were randomized to either induction of labour in week 41 or to expectant management until week 42, were interviewed one to three months after giving birth. RESULTS: The essence is described as follows: labour becomes another journey than the intended one. The women adapted to this new journey by seeing the advantages and handing themselves over to the healthcare system, but at the same time something about giving birth could be lost. The result is further described by its four constituents: planning the unplannable, being a guest at the labour ward, someone else controlling the labour, and overshadowed by how it turned out. CONCLUSION: Induced labour presents a challenge to maternity personnel to support the birthing woman's normal progress, not to rush her through labour, and to involve her in the process.

Prospective observational study investigating the effectiveness, safety, women's experiences and quality of life at 3 months regarding cervical ripening methods for induction of labor at term-The MATUCOL study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The purposes of successful induction of labor (IOL) are to shorten the time for IOL to delivery, increase the vaginal delivery rate, and reduce the rate of maternal and neonatal morbidity. In cases of unfavorable cervix (Bishop score <6), cervical ripening is advised to improve vaginal delivery rate. It may be initiated by mechanical (double balloon catheter (DBC), synthetic osmotic dilator) or pharmacologic (prostaglandins) methods, and the problem is complex due to the multitude of cervical ripening methods. We are constantly looking for the optimal protocol of cervical ripening for each woman. The present study aims to elucidate whether cervical ripening method is associated with increase rate of vaginal delivery, good women's experience and unaltered long-term quality of life after cervical ripening at term regarding maternal and obstetric characteristics. METHODS AND DESIGN: The MATUCOL study is a monocentric, prospective, observational study of all consecutive women who required cervical ripening (Bishop score <6) using different methods (DBC, vaginal dinoprostone, oral misoprostol) with a live fetus at term (≥37 weeks) between January 2020 and August 2021. The outcomes will be mode of delivery, maternal and neonatal morbidity, discomfort/pain assessments during cervical ripening, women's experience and satisfaction, and the impact of cervical ripening on the health-related quality of life at 3 months. If it reports a significant efficacy/safety/perinatal morbidity/women's satisfaction/quality of life at 3 months post-delivery associated with a method of cervical ripening in a specific situation (gestational and/or fetal disease) using a multivariate analysis, its use should be reconsidered in clinical practice. DISCUSSION: This study will reveal that some cervical ripening methods will be more effectiveness, safe, with good women's experiences and QOL at 3 months compared to others regarding maternal and obstetric characteristics. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is being performed at La Roche sur Yon Hospital following registration as GNEDS on January 8, 2020.

Methods of induction of labor and women's experience: a population-based cohort study with mediation analyses.

BACKGROUND: Negative childbirth experience may affect mother wellbeing and health. However, it is rarely evaluated in studies comparing methods of induction of labor (IoL). AIM: To compare women's experience of IoL according to the method, considering the mediating role of interventions and complications of delivery. METHODS: We used data from the MEDIP prospective population-based cohort, including all women with IoL during one month in seven French perinatal networks. The experience of IoL, assessed at 2 months postpartum, was first compared between cervical ripening and oxytocin, and secondarily between different cervical ripening methods. Mediation analyses were used to measure the direct and indirect effects of cervical ripening on maternal experience, through delivery with interventions or complications. FINDINGS: The response rate was 47.8% (n = 1453/3042). Compared with oxytocin (n = 541), cervical ripening (n = 910) was associated less often with feelings that labor went 'as expected' (adjusted risk ratio for the direct effect 0.78, 95%CI [0.70-0.88]), length of labor was 'acceptable' (0.76[0.71-0.82]), 'vaginal discomfort' was absent (0.77[0.69-0.85]) and with lower global satisfaction (0.90[0.84-0.96]). Interventions and complications mediated between 6 and 35% of the total effect of cervical ripening on maternal experience. Compared to the dinoprostone insert, maternal experience was not significantly different with the other prostaglandins. The balloon catheter was associated with less pain. DISCUSSION: Cervical ripening was associated with a less positive experience of childbirth, whatever the method, only partly explained by interventions and complications of delivery. CONCLUSION: Counselling and support of women requiring cervical ripening might be enhanced to improve the experience of IoL.

Women's expectations and experiences of labor induction - a questionnaire-based analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although labor induction is a commonly used procedure in obstetrical care, there are limited data on its psycho-emotional effects on the woman. This study analysed the expectations and experiences of women in different routes of labor induction. The study's primary aim was to compare women's delivery experience if induced by orally administrated misoprostol (OMS) compared with misoprostol vaginal insert (MVI). Secondly, an evaluation of women's general satisfaction with induced labor was made, and factors associated with a negative experience. METHODS: Primiparous women (n = 196) with a singleton fetus in cephalic presentation, ≥ 37 weeks of gestation, with a Bishop's score ≤ 4 planning labor induction were randomly allocated to receive either OMS (Cytotec®) or MVI (Misodel®). Data were collected by validated questionnaires, the Wijma Delivery Expectation/Experience Questionnaire (A + B). The pre-labor part of the survey (W-DEQ version A) was given to participants to complete within 1 hour before the start of induction, and the post-labor part of the questionnaire (W-DEQ version B) was administered after birth and collected before the women were discharged from hospital. RESULTS: It was found that 11.8% (17/143) reported a severe fear of childbirth (W-DEQ A score ≥ 85). Before the induction, women with extreme fear had 3.7 times increased risk of experiencing labor induction negatively (OR 3.7 [95% CI, 1.04-13.41]). CONCLUSION: No difference was identified between OMS and MVI when delivery experience among women induced to labor was analysed. Severe fear of childbirth before labor was a risk factor for a negative experience of labor induction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial register number NCT02918110 . Date of registration on May 31, 2016.

Inter-hospital and inter-disciplinary variation in planned birth practices and readiness for change: a survey study.

BACKGROUND: How the application of evidence to planned birth practices, induction of labour (IOL) and prelabour caesarean (CS), differs between Australian maternity units remains poorly understood. Perceptions of readiness for practice change and resources to implement change in individual units are also unclear. AIM: To identify inter-hospital and inter-professional variations in relation to current planned birth practices and readiness for change, reported by clinicians in 7 maternity units. METHOD: Custom-created survey of maternity staff at 7 Sydney hospitals, with questions about women's engagement with decision making, indications for planned birth, timing of birth and readiness for change. Responses from midwives and medical staff, and from each hospital, were compared. FINDINGS: Of 245 completed surveys (27% response rate), 78% were midwives and 22% medical staff. Substantial inter-hospital variation was noted for stated planned birth indication, timing, women's involvement in decision-making practices, as well as in staff perceptions of their unit's readiness for change. Overall, 48% (range 31-64%) and 64% (range 39-89%) agreed on a need to change their unit's caesarean and induction practices respectively. The three units where greatest need for change was perceived also had least readiness for change in terms of leadership, culture, and resources. Regarding inter-disciplinary variation, medical staff were more likely than midwifery staff to believe women were appropriately informed and less likely to believe unit practice change was required. CONCLUSION: Planned birth practices and change readiness varied between participating hospitals and professional groups. Hospitals with greatest perceived need for change perceived least resources to implement such change.

Factors associated with women's birth beliefs and experiences of decision-making in the context of planned birth: A survey study.

OBJECTIVE: In many high-income countries, approximately half of all births are now planned regarding timing, either by elective Caesarean Section (CS) or induction of labour (IOL). To what degree this is explained by women's birth beliefs and preferences, and in turn, factors such as parity and ethnicity that may influence them, is contentious. Within a broader study on Timing of Birth by planned CS or IOL, we aimed to explore the association between demographic and pregnancy factors, with women's birth beliefs and experiences of planned birth decision-making in late pregnancy. DESIGN: Survey study of women's birth beliefs and experiences of planned birth decision-making. Both univariate analysis and ordinal regression modelling was performed to examine the influence of; parity; cultural background; continuity of pregnancy care; CS or IOL; and whether CS was "recommended" or "requested", on women's stated birth beliefs and decision-making experience. SETTING: 8 Sydney hospitals PARTICIPANTS: Women planned to have an IOL or CS between November 2018-July 2019. MEASUREMENT: The survey included four statements regarding birth beliefs and ten statements about experiences of decision-making on a 5-item Likert scale, as well as questions about demographic and pregnancy factors that might influence these beliefs. FINDINGS: Of 340 included surveys, 56% regarded IOL and 44% CS. Women indicated strong belief both that they should be supported to make decisions about their birth and that their doctor/midwife knows what is best for them (over 90% agreement for both). Regarding decision-making, over 90% also agreed they had trust in the person providing information, understood it, and had sufficient time for both questions and decision-making. However only 58% were provided written information, 19% felt they "didn't really have a choice", and 9% felt pressure to make a decision. On both univariate and multivariate analysis, women having CS (versus IOL) expressed more positive views of their experience and involvement in decision-making, as did women experiencing a pregnancy continuity-of-care model. Women identifying as from a specific cultural or ethnic background expressed more negative experiences. On modelling, the studied factors accounted for only a small proportion of the variation in responses (3-19%). CONCLUSIONS: Continuity of pregnancy care was associated with positive decision-making experiences and cultural background with more negative experiences. Women whose planned birth was IOL versus CS also reported more negative decision-making experiences. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Attention to improving quality of information provision, including written information, to women having IOL and women of diverse background, is recommended to improve women's experiences of planned birth decision-making.

Women's experiences of outpatient induction of labour with double balloon catheter or prostaglandin pessary: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: One quarter to one third of women experience induction of labour. Outpatient induction of labour may be safe and effective but women's views of this setting and of different methods of induction are sparse. AIM: To explore women's experiences of outpatient induction of labour with either prostaglandin pessary or double balloon catheter. METHODS: Qualitative study using semi-structured, audio-recorded interviews with twenty-one women recruited to a feasibility trial of outpatient induction of labour. Transcripts were coded and analysed using a thematic framework approach. FINDINGS: Two key themes were identified. 'Ownership of induction of labour' concerned how women understood and experienced the induction of labour process and tried to maintain control of a procedure managed by medical professionals. Women felt unprepared for the steps in the process and for the time it would take. The balloon method was preferred as it was considered a gentler start to the process, although some women reported it was painful on insertion. 'Importance of place' reflected women's associations of the home with comfort, ease of support and distraction, and the hospital with safety yet also with discomfort and delays. DISCUSSION: This sample of women were keen to start induction without hormones. The randomised controlled trial design may have biased the sample towards women who wanted to experience the balloon method and outpatient setting where these were not usually offered, thus further cohort studies would be beneficial. CONCLUSIONS: Women were positive about experiencing the early stages of induction of labour at home with the balloon catheter.

What women want and why. Women's preferences for induction of labour or expectant management in late-term pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Both induction of labour at 41 weeks and expectant management until 42 weeks are common management strategies in low-risk pregnancy since there is no consensus on the optimal timing of induction in late-term pregnancy for the prevention of adverse outcomes. Our aim was to explore maternal preference for either strategy and the influence on quality of life and maternal anxiety on this preference. METHODS: Obstetrical low-risk women with an uncomplicated pregnancy were eligible when they reached a gestational age of 41 weeks. They were asked to fill in questionnaires on quality of life (EQ6D) and anxiety (STAI-state). Reasons of women's preferences for either induction or expectant management were explored in a semi-structured questionnaire containing open ended questions. RESULTS: Of 782 invited women 604 (77.2%) responded. Induction at 41 weeks was preferred by 44.7% (270/604) women, 42.1% (254/604) preferred expectant management until 42 weeks, while 12.2% (74/604) of women did not have a preference. Women preferring induction reported significantly more problems regarding quality of life and were more anxious than women preferring expectant management (p<0.001). Main reasons for preferring induction of labour were: "safe feeling" (41.2%), "pregnancy taking too long" (35.4%) and "knowing what to expect" (18.6%). For women preferring expectant management, the main reason was "wish to give birth as natural as possible" (80.3%). CONCLUSION: Women's preference for induction of labour or a policy of expectant management in late-term pregnancy is influenced by anxiety, quality of life problems (induction), the presence of a wish for natural birth (expectant management), and a variety of additional reasons. This variation in preferences and motivations suggests that there is room for shared decision making in the management of late-term pregnancy.

"I guess baby was just too comfy in there ": A qualitative study of women's experiences of elective late-term induction of labour.

BACKGROUND: The frequency of induction of labour (IOL) in late-term pregnancy has increased significantly, but little is known about how women with uncomplicated pregnancies experience IOL for late-term indication alone. AIM: To explore how women with uncomplicated pregnancies experienced late-term IOL. METHODS: Qualitative interviews were conducted with 23 women who all had labour induced on late-term indication only. Participants were recruited from two Danish hospitals who offered an outpatient induction regime. The women were interviewed 4-8 weeks after birth. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: All women had hoped for a spontaneous birth. Prolonged pregnancy was understood as the body/baby "not being ready", but generally, the women were not worried at that point. Most women felt adequately informed about the reasons for IOL, but some requested more information and time to consider their options. The majority considered IOL to be both an offer and a recommendation. One-third of the participants were initially hesitant but chose/accepted IOL because of weariness from pregnancy and the impatience to deliver a healthy child. The opportunity of outpatient induction was generally appreciated as it allowed the women to continue everyday activities while waiting for labour to begin. Nineteen women reported having a good birthing experience. Two women felt that negative birthing experiences were partly related to IOL. CONCLUSIONS: Most women considered the late-term IOL to be a positive experience. Some women requested more information and time to consider alternatives. These women should be provided with supported opportunities to consider the options.

Women's experiences of decision-making and attitudes in relation to induction of labour: A survey study.

BACKGROUND: Rates of induction of labour have been increasing globally to up to one in three pregnancies in many high-income countries. Although guidelines around induction, and strength of the underlying evidence, vary considerably by indication, shared decision-making is increasingly recognised as key. The aim of this study was to identify women's mode of birth preferences and experiences of shared decision-making for induction of labour. METHOD: An antenatal survey of women booked for an induction at eight Sydney hospitals was conducted. A bespoke questionnaire was created assessing women's demographics, indication for induction, pregnancy model of care, initial birth preferences, and their experience of the decision-making process. RESULTS: Of 189 survey respondents (58% nulliparous), major reported reasons for induction included prolonged pregnancy (38%), diabetes (25%), and suspected fetal growth restriction (8%). Most respondents (72%) had hoped to labour spontaneously. Major findings included 19% of women not feeling like they had a choice about induction of labour, 26% not feeling adequately informed (or uncertain if informed), 17% not being given alternatives, and 30% not receiving any written information on induction of labour. Qualitative responses highlight a desire of women to be more actively involved in decision-making. CONCLUSION: A substantial minority of women did not feel adequately informed or prepared, and indicated they were not given alternatives to induction. Suggested improvements include for face-to-face discussions to be supplemented with written information, and for shared decision-making interventions, such as the introduction of decision aids and training, to be implemented and evaluated.

Characteristics Associated With Consent and Reasons for Declining in a Randomized Trial in Pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the maternal characteristics associated with consent to a randomized trial of labor induction in pregnancy. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of low-risk nulliparous women randomized to induction of labor at 39 weeks or expectant management. During the trial, the Data and Safety Monitoring Committee requested additional fields on the screening log, which already included race and ethnicity: maternal age, type of insurance, and the reason for declining consent if declined. RESULTS: From August 2016 (start of additional data collection) to August 2017, 1,965 (28%) of the 7,112 eligible women consented to the trial. Consent was more likely for Black women (41%, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.47, 95% CI 1.24-1.74), and less likely for Asian women (15%, aOR 0.64, 95% CI 0.48-0.84), compared with White women (24%). Women without private insurance were more likely to consent (38%, aOR 1.55, 95% CI 1.34-1.79), compared with those with private insurance (22%). Younger women were also more likely to consent. Among eligible women who declined participation and provided a reason (68%), preference to be expectantly managed (85%) was most common, a response more common in Asian women (aOR 1.75, 95% CI 1.31-2.33) and less common in women without private insurance (aOR 0.60, 95% CI 0.51-0.70). Not wanting to participate in research was more common in Asian women (aOR 2.41, 95% CI 1.44-4.03). Declining consent because family or friends objected was more common in Asian women (aOR 2.51, 95% CI 1.27-4.95) and women without private insurance (aOR 1.68, 95% CI 1.10-2.59). CONCLUSION: Frequency of consent and reasons for declining consent were associated with age, type of insurance, and race and ethnicity. These findings should be considered when developing recruitment strategies that promote diverse participant representation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinialTrials.gov, NCT01990612.

Maternal perceptions of the experience of attempted labor induction and medically elective inductions: analysis of survey results from listening to mothers in California.

BACKGROUND: The rate of induction of labor in the U.S. has risen from 9.6% in 1990 to 25.7% in 2018, including 31.7% of first-time births. Recent studies that have examined inductions have been small qualitative studies or relied on either medical records or administrative data. This study examines induction from the perspective of those women who experienced it, with a particular focus on the prevalence and predictors of inductions for nonmedical indications, women's experience of pressure to induce labor and the relationship between the attempt to medically initiate labor and cesarean section. METHODS: Study data are drawn from the 2119 respondents to the Listening to Mothers in California survey who were planning to have a vaginal birth in 2016. Mothers were asked if there had been an attempt to medically initiate labor, if it actually started labor, if they felt pressured to have the induction, if they had a cesarean and the reason for the induction. Reasons for induction were classified as either medically indicated or elective. RESULTS: Almost half (47%) of our respondents indicated an attempt was made to medically induce their labor, and 71% of those attempts initiated labor. More than a third of the attempts (37%) were elective. Attempted induction overall was most strongly associated with giving birth at 41+ weeks (aOR 3.28; 95% C.I. 2.21-4.87). Elective inductions were more likely among multiparous mothers and in pregnancies at 39 or 40 weeks. The perception of being pressured to have labor induced was related to higher levels of education, maternal preference for less medical intervention in birth, having an obstetrician compared to a midwife and gestational ages of 41+ weeks. Cesarean birth was more likely in the case of overall induction (aOR 1.51; 95% C.I. 1.11-2.07) and especially following a failed attempt at labor induction (aOR 4.50; 95% C.I. 2.93-6.90). CONCLUSION: Clinicians counselling mothers concerning the need for labor induction should be aware of mothers' perceptions about birth and engage in true shared decision making in order to avoid the maternal perception of being pressured into labor induction.

Maternal childbirth experience in induced and spontaneous labour measured in a visual analog scale and the factors influencing it; a two-year cohort study.

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.

Induction of labor, and physiological and psychological stress responses as expressed by salivary cortisol: a prospective study.

PURPOSE: To describe patterns of physiological and psychological stress during induced labor and their correlation to obstetrical and neonatal outcomes. METHODS: This prospective, observational study included 167 women, with low-risk, singleton pregnancies, who delivered at term, at a tertiary academic center from 2015 through 2018. Among them, 72 (43%) underwent induction and 95 (57%) had spontaneous labor onset. Physiological stress was evaluated by salivary cortisol measurements and emotional stress by questionnaires (visual analogue stress scale 0-10) during latent phase, active phase and full dilation stages of labor, as well as 2 min and 2 h postpartum. Cord blood cortisol and pH were obtained. Stress patterns were compared between parturients who did or did not undergo induction. Modes of delivery, labor and delivery complications, and early neonatal outcomes were compared. Mothers completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. RESULTS: Induced women had lower cortisol concentrations during the latent phase compared to spontaneous onset of labor (p = 0.003), with no differences during active (p = 0.237), full dilation (0.668), 2 min and 2 h after delivery (p = 0.666). Stress scale and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale scores were similar between groups. Cord cortisol (p = 0.294), 1-min Apgar score ≤ 7 (p = 0.502) and 5-min Apgar score ≤ 7 (p = 0.37) were similar. All had cord pH > 7. CONCLUSIONS: Induction does not increase stress during labor. Moreover, it might have a positive effect on reducing cortisol during the latent phase. These findings might reassure women who are concerned about induction of labor.

Women's experience of induction of labor using PGE2 as an inpatient versus balloon catheter as an outpatient.

OBJECTIVE: Induction of labor (IOL) typically involves cervical priming in an inpatient setting. Outpatient cervical priming may be a safe and cost-effective alternative. However, little is known about women's preference and the impact of outpatient cervical priming on their healthcare experience. The objective was to compare women's healthcare experiences following IOL using a balloon catheter and going home, versus prostaglandin (PG) and remaining an inpatient. STUDY DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial was undertaken across eight Australian maternity hospitals. Between September 2015 and October 2018, 695 women with uncomplicated term singleton pregnancies were randomized. Of these, 215 and 233 women in the balloon-outpatient and PG-inpatient groups, respectively, received the allocated intervention. The PG group received Dinoprostone gel or controlled-release tape. The balloon group had a double-balloon catheter inserted and went home. Experiential and quality-of-life outcomes were measured via written questionnaire after birth. The primary outcome was a composite neonatal measure. Women's healthcare experience, health-state (EQ-5D-3 L) and pain scores are reported here. RESULTS: Questionnaire data were available for 366 (81.7 %) women enrolled who received their treatment allocation. More women in the balloon-outpatient group reported they would choose IOL next pregnancy (49.2 % vs 38.4 %; p = 0.037) and desire the same method (72.4 % vs 61.1 %; p = 0.022). The balloon-outpatient group experienced higher pain scores at the start of IOL (median (IQR) 3(2-5) vs 2(1-4); p = 0.002) but lower scores at time of rupture of membranes (3(1-5) vs 4(2-6); p = 0.007). The EQ-5D-3 L health-utility index did not differ significantly between the groups (0.77 vs 0.78; p = 0.899). CONCLUSIONS: Women report similar healthcare experiences following balloon-outpatient compared to PG-impatient IOL, but are more likely to desire the same method next pregnancy if IOL is required. If both options are available, then differences in experience should be shared with women, alongside differences in clinical outcomes as part of their decision-making process.

Do lifetime anxiety disorders (anxiety liability) and pregnancy-related anxiety predict complications during pregnancy and delivery?

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that maternal anxiety is associated with adverse pregnancy and delivery outcomes, such as preterm birth, vaginal bleedings and low birth weight. AIMS: To examine the association of lifetime anxiety disorders and pregnancy-related anxiety and complications during pregnancy and delivery. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective-longitudinal study (MARI). SUBJECTS: N = 306 pregnant women who were investigated repeatedly during the peripartum period. OUTCOME MEASURES: Information on lifetime anxiety disorders was assessed using a dimensional score (lifetime anxiety liability index) based on the standardized Composite International Diagnostic Interview for Women (CIDI-V). Pregnancy-related anxiety was surveyed with the Pregnancy and Childbirth Related Fears (PCF) questionnaire. Common pregnancy (e.g. vaginal bleedings) and delivery complications (e.g. labor induction) were assessed via medical records, interviews and questionnaires. RESULTS: The global tests on the association between lifetime anxiety liability and pregnancy complications and on the association between pregnancy-related anxiety and pregnancy/delivery complications revealed significant associations. Further analyses revealed associations of lifetime anxiety liability with preterm labor (OR = 1.6, 95% CI = 1.2-2.0) as well as pregnancy-related anxiety with vaginal bleedings (OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 1.0-1.8), preterm labor (OR = 1.3, 95% CI = 1.0-1.7), gestational diabetes (OR 0.5, 95% CI = 0.2-0.9), labor induction (OR = 1.5, 95% CI = 1.1-1.9) and use of labor medication (OR = 1.6, 95% CI = 1.2-2.0). After adjustment for maternal age, maternal body mass index, maternal smoking, socioeconomic status (occupation, household income) and social support (cohabitation), the associations between pregnancy-related anxiety and labor induction as well as use of labor medication remained significant. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy-related anxiety should be regularly assessed and, if necessary, treated during (early) pregnancy to minimize risks for complications during delivery.

Dissatisfaction of women with induction of labour according to parity: Results of a population-based cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the factors associated with dissatisfaction in women whose labour was induced, according to parity. DESIGN: Prospective population-based cohort study. SETTING: Seven French perinatal health networks including 94 maternity units PARTICIPANTS: Among 3042 consecutive women who underwent induction of labour (IoL) with a live foetus from November 17 to December 20, 2015, in participating maternity units, this study included the 1453 who answered the self-administered questionnaire about their experience of IoL at two months post-delivery. MEASUREMENTS: The associations between women's dissatisfaction at two months post-delivery and the characteristics of their pregnancy, labour, and delivery were assessed with multivariable logistic regression models. Analyses were stratified for nulliparous and parous women. Multivariable mixed models were used to take a random effect for the maternity unit into account. FINDINGS: The response rate was 47.8% (n = 1453/3042). Overall, 30% of the nulliparous women were dissatisfied (n = 231/770) and 19.7% (n = 130/659) of the parous women. The specific independent determinants of dissatisfaction for nulliparous women were antenatal birth classes that failed to include discussion of IoL (OR: 2.68, 95% CI [1.37; 5.23]) and lack of involvement in the decision-making process (OR: 1.92, 95% CI [1.23; 3.02]). For the parous women, a specific determinant was a delivery that lasted more than 24 h (OR: 4.04, 95% CI [1.78; 9.14]). Determinants of maternal dissatisfaction common to both groups were unbearable vaginal discomfort (respectively, OR: 1.98, 95% CI [1.16; 3.37] and OR: 4.23, 95% CI [2.04; 8.77]), inadequate pain relief (respectively, OR: 5.55, 95% CI [3.48; 8.86] and OR: 9.17, 95% CI [5.24; 16.02]), lack of attention to requests (respectively OR: 3.81, 95% CI [2.35; 6.19] and OR: 5.01, 95% CI [2.38; 10.52]), caesarean delivery (respectively, OR: 5.55, 95% CI [3.41; 9.03] and OR: 4.61, 95% CI [2.02; 10.53]) and severe maternal complications (respectively, OR: 2.45, 95% CI [1.02; 5.88] and OR: 5.29, 95% CI [1.32; 21.21]). KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: To reduce dissatisfaction in nulliparous women, IoL should be discussed during antenatal birth classes and women should be made to feel that they shared in the medical decision to perform IoL. For parous women, care providers should inform them that the duration of delivery may exceed 24 h. Continuous support for all women during IoL should pay closer attention to vaginal discomfort, pain and women's requests. Postpartum discussions with mothers should be arranged to enable conversation about the experience of unexpected events.

[The ARRIVE Trial†: is it time to move towards a universal recommendation of induction of labor at term?] / Etude «â€ ARRIVE†¼â€ : vers une recommandation globale de déclenchement du travail d'accouchement à terme†?

Both cesarean surgery and induction of labor have become common procedures performed in all labor wards in an attempt to reduce adverse obstetrical and neonatal outcomes. Thus, recent evidence, led by the ARRIVE Trial, demonstrated that elective induction at 39 weeks reduced the rates of cesarean deliveries and of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. However, some concerns must be addressed, as the benefits of universal policies have to be outweighed with the current circumstances of implementation, the economic impact, the number of procedures needed to effectively reduce complications, and, above all, women's perception towards this approach. Therefore, it would be interesting to explore individualization strategies, instead of general recommendations, to offer personalized care.

Afin de réduire les complications obstétricales et néonatales, la césarienne ainsi que le déclenchement de l'accouchement sont souvent pratiqués. Récemment, l'étude ARRIVE a démontré que le déclenchement à 39 semaines d'aménorrhée (SA) permet de diminuer le taux de césariennes et de complications hypertensives de la grossesse. Il reste à déterminer les avantages d'une recommandation universelle dans les circonstances actuelles, son impact économique, le nombre de déclenchements nécessaire pour réduire efficacement le taux des complications obstétricales et, surtout, la perception des femmes à l'égard de cette procédure. Finalement, il serait plus intéressant de développer des stratégies individualisées de prise en charge plutôt que des recommandations globales, afin d'offrir une prise en charge la plus personnalisée possible.