Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2015
Foley catheter for induction of labor: potential barriers to adopting the technique.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Edwards R K, Szychowski J M, Bodea-Braescu A V, Biggio J R, Lin M G
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if a learning curve exists for cervical Foley placement for labor induction in women with unfavorable cervices and whether labor curves differ compared with the dinoprostone insert (PGE2).
STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial.
RESULT: For Foley and PGE2, successful placement occurred in 157/185 (85%) and 188/191 (98%) women (P<0.001). Unsuccessful Foley placements decreased over time (P=0.005); all occurred at the site previously using PGE2 preferentially. In women with allocated agent placed successfully who achieved complete cervical dilation, median progress with Foley (n=112), compared with PGE2 (n=123), was: 1-3 cm (6.2 vs 14.1 h; P<0.001), 3-6 cm (11.1 vs 6.7 h; P<0.001) and 6-10 cm (1.9 vs 1.5 h; P=0.14).
CONCLUSION: There is a learning curve for placing cervical Foley catheters. Despite faster times to delivery, Foley is associated with slower dilation from 3 to 6 cm compared with PGE2.
STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial.
RESULT: For Foley and PGE2, successful placement occurred in 157/185 (85%) and 188/191 (98%) women (P<0.001). Unsuccessful Foley placements decreased over time (P=0.005); all occurred at the site previously using PGE2 preferentially. In women with allocated agent placed successfully who achieved complete cervical dilation, median progress with Foley (n=112), compared with PGE2 (n=123), was: 1-3 cm (6.2 vs 14.1 h; P<0.001), 3-6 cm (11.1 vs 6.7 h; P<0.001) and 6-10 cm (1.9 vs 1.5 h; P=0.14).
CONCLUSION: There is a learning curve for placing cervical Foley catheters. Despite faster times to delivery, Foley is associated with slower dilation from 3 to 6 cm compared with PGE2.