Does enhanced "bundling" criteria improve outcomes? A comparative study of elective inductions.

OBJECTIVE

To assess outcomes and costs of dyads achieving elective induction bundle criteria with a favorable Bishop score.

STUDY

DESIGN

In a historical automated records-based cohort study, 180 dyads undergoing elective induction bundling at a single institution from 2009 to 2010 were compared to a pre-introduction of bundling cohort. The bundled cohort was then compared by Bishop score.

RESULTS

The bundled cohort (n = 180) had a lower cesarean delivery rate (12% vs. 21%, p = 0.01), but neonatal special or intensive care admissions were not statistically significant compared to the pre-introduction of bundling cohort (n = 473). Ninety-six percent (n = 173) of the bundled cohort achieved bundle criteria. Those with a Bishop score > 6 (52%, n = 90) had fewer cesarean deliveries (4% vs. 19%, p = 0.003), fewer neonatal special or intensive care admissions (1% vs. 10%, p = 0.015), shorter induction time to vaginal delivery (8.8 vs. 17 hrs, p < 0.001), fewer cesareans for dystocia (75% vs. 94%, p = 0.002) or fetal heart rate abnormalities (25% vs. 50%, p = 0.015), and had one-sixth the average net income lost ($423 vs. $2,600, p < 0.001) compared to bundle achievers with a Bishop score of < or = 6.

CONCLUSION

The elective induction bundle does not guarantee quality and should require favorable cervix instead of documented Bishop score to proceed with induction.