Continuous vs intermittent induction of labor with oxytocin in nulliparous patients: a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Oxytocin is considered the drug of choice for the induction of labor, although the optimal protocol and infusion duration remain to be determined. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess whether the duration of oxytocin infusion increases 24-hour delivery rates and affects the length of time-to-delivery and patient's experience. STUDY DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial was performed at a single tertiary medical center, between January 1, 2020 and June 30, 2022. Nulliparous patients with a singleton pregnancy at a vertex presentation and a Bishop score ≥6 were randomly assigned to receive either continuous (16 hours, with a 4 hours pause in between infusions) or intermittent (8 hours, with a 4 hours pause in between infusions) oxytocin infusion, until delivery. In both groups, infusion was halted when signs of maternal or fetal compromise were observed. Randomization was conducted with a computer randomization sequence generation program. The primary outcome was delivery within 24 hours from the first oxytocin infusion and the secondary outcome included time-to-delivery, mode of delivery, and additional maternal and neonatal outcomes. Seventy-two patients per group were randomized to reach 80% statistical power with a 20% difference in the primary outcome according to previous studies. RESULTS: A total of 153 patients were randomized, 72 to the continuous oxytocin infusion group and 81 to the intermittent infusion group. The total oxytocin infusion time was similar between the groups. Patients in the continuous arm were more likely to deliver within 24 hours from oxytocin initiation (79.73% vs 62.96%, P<.05), and had a shorter oxytocin-to-delivery time interval, compared with patients receiving intermittent treatment (9.3±3.7 hours vs 21±11.7 hours, P<.001). Furthermore, time from ruptured membranes to delivery was shorter (9.3±3.7 hours vs 21±11.7 hours; P<.0001) and chorioamnionitis was less frequent (9.46% vs 21%; P<.05) in the continuous compared with the intermittent arm. Cesarean delivery rate was 20% in both groups (P=.226). There was no difference in postpartum hemorrhage, or adverse neonatal outcomes between the groups. Patients receiving continuous oxytocin infusion were more satisfied with the birthing experience. CONCLUSION: Continuous infusion of oxytocin for labor induction in nulliparous patients with a favorable cervix may be superior to intermittent oxytocin infusion, because it shortens time-to-delivery, decreases chorioamnionitis rate, and improves maternal satisfaction, without affecting adverse maternal or neonatal outcomes.