Winchester, Abigail. Outcomes associated with elective induction versus expectant management: a retrospective analysis. Retrieved from https://doi.org/doi:10.7282/t3-cvr1-5r72
DescriptionPurpose of Project: Current recommendations permit labor to be induced starting at 39 weeks, according to patient and provider preference. This has been associated this with an increase in length of labor, time spent in the labor unit, risk of operative delivery, and hemorrhage, compared to admissions for expectant management. Between March-May, 2020, this provider practice was temporarily suspended. This policy change was an opportunity to evaluate differences length of labor, length of hospitalization, and resource utilization among women with natural onset of labor or women electively induced. The purpose of this project was to evaluate these outcomes, by comparing the same time periods in 2019 and 2020, and develop labor admission recommendations.
Methodology: A retrospective data analysis of 77 charts was completed. It evaluated nulliparous women between 39-42 weeks gestation with a singleton pregnancy. These were admitted for elective induction of labor, medical induction, or expectant management. Analysis included outcomes among each group in both time frames.
Results: Admission for expectant management was associated with the shortest mean length of labor and mean length of hospital stay, compared to elective inductions of labor and medical inductions of labor. It was found to have a lower resource utilization percentage for multiple items available during the labor and delivery process, compared to the other two groups.
Implication for practice: Implications of these results question current clinical practice and health policy for admission and the need for further research on this topic. As well, there are implications related to reducing costs related to care and patient education in supporting decision-making.