Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Induction of labour at 41 weeks versus expectant management and induction of labour at 42 weeks (SWEdish Post-term Induction Study, SWEPIS): multicentre, open label, randomised, superiority trial
Gothenburg Univ, Sahlgrenska Univ Hosp, Sahlgrenska Acad, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol,Inst Clin Sci, S-41685 Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2475-2226
Karolinska Univ Hosp, Karolinska Inst, Dept Womens & Childrens Hlth, Stockholm, Sweden.
Gothenburg Univ, Sahlgrenska Acad, Inst Hlth & Care Sci, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Gothenburg Univ, Sahlgrenska Univ Hosp, Sahlgrenska Acad, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol,Inst Clin Sci, S-41685 Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5648-3505
Show others and affiliations
2019 (English)In: BMJ. British Medical Journal, E-ISSN 1756-1833, Vol. 367, article id l6131Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

OBJECTIVE To evaluate if induction of labour at 41 weeks improves perinatal and maternal outcomes in women with a low risk pregnancy compared with expectant management and induction of labour at 42 weeks. DESIGN Multicentre, open label, randomised controlled superiority trial. SETTING 14 hospitals in Sweden, 2016-18. PARTICIPANTS 2760 women with a low risk uncomplicated singleton pregnancy randomised (1:1) by the Swedish Pregnancy Register. 1381 women were assigned to the induction group and 1379 were assigned to the expectant management group. INTERVENTIONS Induction of labour at 41 weeks and expectant management and induction of labour at 42 weeks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary outcome was a composite perinatal outcome including one or more of stillbirth, neonatal mortality, Apgar score less than 7 at five minutes, pH less than 7.00 or metabolic acidosis (pH <7.05 and base deficit >12 mmol/L) in the umbilical artery, hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy, intracranial haemorrhage, convulsions, meconium aspiration syndrome, mechanical ventilation within 72 hours, or obstetric brachial plexus injury. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. RESULTS The study was stopped early owing to a significantly higher rate of perinatal mortality in the expectant management group. The composite primary perinatal outcome did not differ between the groups: 2.4% (33/1381) in the induction group and 2.2% (31/1379) in the expectant management group (relative risk 1.06, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.73; P=0.90). No perinatal deaths occurred in the induction group but six (five stillbirths and one early neonatal death) occurred in the expectant management group (P=0.03). The proportion of caesarean delivery, instrumental vaginal delivery, or any major maternal morbidity did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSIONS This study comparing induction of labour at 41 weeks with expectant management and induction at 42 weeks does not show any significant difference in the primary composite adverse perinatal outcome. However, a reduction of the secondary outcome perinatal mortality is observed without increasing adverse maternal outcomes. Although these results should be interpreted cautiously, induction of labour ought to be offered to women no later than at 41 weeks and could be one (of few) interventions that reduces the rate of stillbirths.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
BMJ Publishing Group Ltd, 2019. Vol. 367, article id l6131
National Category
Public Health, Global Health, Social Medicine and Epidemiology Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-400104DOI: 10.1136/bmj.l6131ISI: 000498841000001PubMedID: 31748223OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-400104DiVA, id: diva2:1380890
Available from: 2019-12-19 Created: 2019-12-19 Last updated: 2019-12-19Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(423 kB)13 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 423 kBChecksum SHA-512
430dc03c05acfc58dc27d7c166e84af75d4481f224b6989de50fea26a3bee38a727a8d2ece111d3df164ba03478389c7900ee19e2e379e99dc39c47399343529
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Wennerholm, Ulla-BrittAlkmark, MårtenJonsson, MariaSengpiel, VerenaWesström, JanWikström, Anna-Karin
By organisation
Clinical ObstetricsCenter for Clinical Research Dalarna
In the same journal
BMJ. British Medical Journal
Public Health, Global Health, Social Medicine and EpidemiologyObstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Medicine

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 13 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 39 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf