Maternal and Neonatal Outcomes in Full-Term Pregnancy with Unfavorable Bishop Score

Document Type : Original Article (s)

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicne, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicne, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

3 Student of Medicine, Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan AND Student Research Committee, School of Medicine, Aja University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Background: Unfavorable Bioshop score, a score pre-labor of cervical ripening, is a marker for screening delayed labor. This study aimed to determine maternal and neonatal outcomes in full-term pregnancy with unfavorable Bishop score.Methods: In a cross-sectional study, 400 full-term pregnant women were selected and Bishop score was determined at labor induction. All mothers and neonates were followed until discharged from hospital and maternal and neonatal outcomes in those with low Bishop score were investigated.Findings: The mean Bishop score was 5.9 ± 2.1; 174 (39.9%) and 262 mothers (60.1%) had unfavorable and favorable Bishop score, respectively. The mean Bishop score was higher in normal delivery. In addition, Bishop score was different based on causes of cesarean, the results of oxytocin challenge test (OCT), and preeclampsia. The mean Bishop score was lower in mothers with post-partum hemorrhage.Conclusion: According to increase of maternal and neonatal complications, pregnant women with unfavorable Bishop score must be hospitalized; so, the risk of these complications, including neonatal asphyxia would be reduced.

Keywords

References

  1. Molina G, Weiser TG, Lipsitz SR, Esquivel MM, Uribe-Leitz T, Azad T, et al. Relationship between cesarean delivery rate and maternal and neonatal mortality. JAMA 2015; 314(21): 2263-70.
  2. Appropriate technology for birth. Lancet 1985; 2(8452): 436-7.
  3. Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Osterman MJ, Curtin SC, Matthews TJ. Births: Final data for 2013. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2015; 64(1): 1-65.
  4. Tromans PM, Beazley J, Shenouda PI. Comparative study of oestradiol and prostaglandin E2 vaginal gel for ripening the unfavourable cervix before induction of labour. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1981; 282(6265): 679-81.
  5. Cunningham G. Williams obstetrics and gynecology. Trans. Ghazi Jahani B. Tehran, Iran: Golban Publications; 2014. p. 111-5. [In Persian].
  6. Sciscione AC, Nguyen L, Manley J, Pollock M, Maas B, Colmorgen G. A randomized comparison of transcervical Foley catheter to intravaginal misoprostol for preinduction cervical ripening. Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 97(4): 603-7.
  7. Alexander JM, MCIntire DD, Leveno KJ. Prolonged pregnancy: Induction of labor and cesarean births. Obstet Gynecol 2001; 97(6): 911-5.
  8. Crowley P. Interventions for preventing or improving the outcome of delivery at or beyond term. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000; (2): CD000170.
  9. Treger M, Hallak M, Silberstein T, Friger M, Katz M, Mazor M. Post-term pregnancy: Should induction of labor be considered before 42 weeks? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2002; 11(1): 50-3.
  10. Yousef zadeh S, Akbarzadeh R, Eftekhar Yazdi M. The effectiveness of induction of labor instead of fetal observation on outcome of post term pregnancy. Iran J Obstet Gynecol Infertil 2007; 10(2): 49-54. [In Persian].
  11. Maly Z, Novotna M, Pulkrabkova S, Gogela J. Comparison of the risk of fetal hypoxia in active and expectant management of post-term delivery. Ceska Gynekol 2002; 67(Suppl 1): 13-5.
  12. Edwards RK, Richards DS. Preinduction cervical assessment. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2000; 43(3): 440-6.
  13. Nadery T, Heidari Z. Correlation between bishop score and success of induction of labor in term pregnancies. Sci J Hamadan Univ Med Sci 2003; 9(4): 18-22. [In Persian].
  14. Naghizadeh S, Fathnezhad Kazemi A, Hemmatzadeh S, Ebrahimpour M. The relationship between the Bishops score at admission and deliver outcomes in nulliparous women in 29 Bahman hospital, Tabriz. Iran J Obstet Gynecol Infertil 2016; 19(6): 11-21. [In Persian].
  15. Ezebialu IU, Eke AC, Eleje GU, Nwachukwu CE. Methods for assessing pre-induction cervical ripening. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; (6): CD010762.
  16. Johnson DP, Davis NR, Brown AJ. Risk of cesarean delivery after induction at term in nulliparous women with an unfavorable cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 188(6): 1565-9.
  17. Mishanina E, Rogozinska E, Thatthi T, Uddin-Khan R, Khan KS, Meads C. Use of labour induction and risk of cesarean delivery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. CMAJ 2014; 186(9): 665-73.
  18. Navve D, Orenstein N, Ribak R, Daykan Y, Shechter-Maor G, Biron-Shental T. Is the Bishop-score significant in predicting the success of labor induction in multiparous women? J Perinatol 2017; 37(5): 480-3.
Journal of Isfahan Medical School
Volume 35, Issue 435 - Serial Number 435
May and June 2017
Pages 731-738

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 27 March 2017
  • Revise Date: 01 November 2024
  • Accept Date: 06 April 2022

Share

How to cite

Statistics