| Autor: |
Julia Kummer, Josefine Theresia Koenigbauer, Yvonne Callister, Luisa Pech, Werner Rath, Silke Wegener, Lars Hellmeyer |
| Rok vydání: |
2022 |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
Journal of perinatal medicineReferences. 50(9) |
| ISSN: |
1619-3997 |
| Popis: |
Objectives With an increasing incidence of labor induction the socioeconomic costs are increasing and the burden on hospital capacities is rising. In addition, the worldwide SARS-CoV-2 pandemic asks for improvements in patient care during pregnancy and delivery while decreasing the patient-staff contact. Here, we are retrospectively analyzing and comparing a mechanical ripening device that is utilized as an outpatient procedure to misoprostol and dinoprostone as inpatient induction methods in a low risk cohort. Methods This is a retrospective comparative analysis of obstetric data on patients who presented for cervical ripening and labor induction. Ninety-six patients received a mechanical ripening agent as an outpatient procedure. As a control group, we used 99 patients with oral misoprostol (PGE1) and 42 patients with vaginal dinoprostone (PGE2) for cervical ripening in an inpatient setting. Data from 2016 until 2020 were analysed. Results Baseline characteristics showed no significant differences. Delivery modes were similar in all groups. The time period from patient admission to onset of labor was significantly shorter in the outpatient group (p Conclusions New approaches are required to decrease individual contacts between patients and staff while maintaining a high quality patient care in obstetrics. This analysis reveals that outpatient mechanical cervical ripening can be as safe and effective as inpatient cervical ripening with PGE1/PGE2, while lowering patient-staff contact and total hospital stays and therefore decreasing the socioeconomic costs. |
| Databáze: |
OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
