• About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Login
    • ObGFirst
  • COVID-19
  • Alerts
  • OB
  • 2T US Atlas
  • The Genome
  • GYN
    • GYN
    • Sexual Health
  • Primary Care
  • Your Practice
  • GrandRounds
  • My Bookshelf
  • Now@ObG
  • Media
About Us Contact Us Login ObGFirst
  • COVID-19
  • Alerts
  • OB
  • 2T US Atlas
  • The Genome
  • GYN
    • GYN
    • Sexual Health
  • Primary Care
  • Your Practice
  • GrandRounds
  • My Bookshelf
  • Now@ObG
  • Media
Grand Rounds

Meta-Analysis: Outpatient vs Inpatient Cervical Ripening

image_pdfFavoriteLoadingFavorite

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:

  • McDonagh et al. (Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2021) compared cervical ripening in an outpatient vs inpatient setting or different methods used in the outpatient setting

METHODS:

  • Systematic review and meta-analysis
  • Data sources
    • Databases and reference lists through August 2020
  • Study inclusion criteria
    • RCTs and cohort studies
    • Include analysis of outpatient cervical ripening using prostaglandins and mechanical methods in pregnant women at or beyond 37 weeks of gestation
  • Study design
    • Data abstraction and risk of bias assessment were conducted by two reviewers
    • Random effects models were used for meta-analysis of results from two or more studies
  • Primary outcomes
    • Birth-related outcomes (e.g. total time from admission to vaginal birth, cesarean rate)
    • Neonatal harms (e.g. mortality, infection)
    • Maternal harms (e.g. hemorrhage, infection)

RESULTS:

  • 30 RCTs and 10 cohort studies: 9,618 pregnancies
    • Weighted mean age: 28.8 years
    • Weighted BMI: 26.7
  • Quality of evidence: Low or insufficient strength of evidence
  • Incidence of cesarean delivery
    • No difference found for inpatient vs outpatient setting  
      • Ripening method did not alter outcome
      • Most evidence was available was for single-balloon catheters and dinoprostone
  • Harms were inconsistently reported or inadequately defined
  • There were no differences in
    • Neonatal infection for inpatient vs outpatient dinoprostone
    • Birth trauma for inpatient vs outpatient single balloon catheter
    • Shoulder dystocia for outpatient dinoprostone vs placebo
    • Maternal infection for outpatient vs inpatient single-balloon catheters OR outpatient prostaglandins vs placebo
    • Postpartum hemorrhage for outpatient catheter vs inpatient dinoprostone
  • Evidence on misoprostol, hygroscopic dilators, and other outcomes (eg, perinatal mortality and time to vaginal birth) was insufficient

CONCLUSION:

  • Outpatient cervical ripening (with single-balloon catheter or dinoprostone) did not increase the incidence of cesarean delivery in women with low-risk pregnancies
  • There was no significant difference in incidence of adverse outcomes between the inpatient and outpatient samples
  • Limitations of this study include low certainty of evidence that would allow for “definitive conclusions” and in addition
    • Not all possible harms were included
    • Generalizability may be limited to 30 year olds, singleton fetuses, cephalic presentation, and no major comorbidities
    • Not all methods were sufficiently covered, specifically double-balloon catheters, hygroscopic dilators, misoprostol, or different prostaglandin doses and routes of administration
  • The authors conclude

The finding that outpatient cervical ripening with dinoprostone and single-balloon catheters did not impose increased risk of cesarean delivery, with at least no strong signals of clinically important increased risk of harms, may be encouraging for women who are interested in outpatient cervical ripening

Learn More – Primary Sources:

Outpatient Cervical Ripening A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Want to stay on top of key guidelines and research papers?

ObGFirst® – Try It Free! »

image_pdfFavoriteLoadingFavorite
< Previous
All Grand Rounds Posts
Next >

Related ObG Topics:

RCT Results: Can Outpatient Cervical Ripening with Foley Decrease Time from Admission to Delivery?
Cochrane Review 2017: Outpatient Cervical Ripening and Labor Induction
Outpatient Balloon Catheters for Labor Induction – Assessment of Potential Risks?

Sections

  • COVID-19
  • Alerts
  • OB
  • GYN
    • GYN
    • Sexual Health
  • 2T US Atlas
  • The Genome
  • Primary Care
  • Your Practice
  • Grand Rounds
  • My Bookshelf
  • Now@ObG
  • Media

Are you an
ObG Insider?

Get specially curated clinical summaries delivered to your inbox every week for free

  • Site Map/
  • © ObG Project/
  • Terms and Conditions/
  • Privacy/
  • Contact Us/
© ObG Project
SSL Certificate


  • Already an ObGFirst Member?
    Welcome back

    Log In

    Want to sign up?
    Get guideline notifications
    CME Included

    Sign Up

Download Your ObG App
HERE!

Sign In

Lost your password?

Sign Up for ObGFirst and Stay Ahead

  • - Professional guideline notifications
  • - Daily summary of a clinically relevant
    research paper
  • - Includes 1 hour of CME every month

ObGFirst Free Trial

Already a Member of ObGFirst®?

Please log in to ObGFirst to access the 2T US Atlas

Password Trouble?

Not an ObGFirst® Member Yet?

  • - Access 2T US Atlas
  • - Guideline notifications
  • - Daily research paper summaries
  • - And lots more!
ObGFirst Free Trial

Media - Internet

Computer System Requirements

OBG Project CME requires a modern web browser (Internet Explorer 10+, Mozilla Firefox, Apple Safari, Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge). Certain educational activities may require additional software to view multimedia, presentation, or printable versions of their content. These activities will be marked as such and will provide links to the required software. That software may be: Adobe Flash, Apple QuickTime, Adobe Acrobat, Microsoft PowerPoint, Windows Media Player, or Real Networks Real One Player.

Disclosure of Unlabeled Use

This educational activity may contain discussion of published and/or investigational uses of agents that are not indicated by the FDA. The planners of this activity do not recommend the use of any agent outside of the labeled indications.

The opinions expressed in the educational activity are those of the faculty and do not necessarily represent the views of the planners. Please refer to the official prescribing information for each product for discussion of approved indications, contraindications, and warnings.

Disclaimer

Participants have an implied responsibility to use the newly acquired information to enhance patient outcomes and their own professional development. The information
presented in this activity is not meant to serve as a guideline for patient management. Any procedures, medications, or other courses of diagnosis or treatment discussed or suggested in this activity should not be used by clinicians without evaluation of their patient’s conditions and possible contraindications and/or dangers in use, review of any applicable manufacturer’s product information, and comparison with recommendations of other authorities.

Jointly provided by

NOT ENOUGH CME HOURS

It appears you don't have enough CME Hours to take this Post-Test. Feel free to buy additional CME hours or upgrade your current CME subscription plan

Subscribe

JOIN OBGFIRST AND GET CME/CE CREDITS

One of the benefits of an ObGFirst subscription is the ability to earn CME/CE credits from the ObG entries you read. Tap the button to learn more about ObGFirst

Learn More
Leaving ObG Website

You are now leaving the ObG website and on your way to PRIORITY at UCSF, an independent website. Therefore, we are not responsible for the content or availability of this site