Association between interpregnancy interval and the labor curve

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm Pub Date : 2024-08-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101425
{"title":"Association between interpregnancy interval and the labor curve","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ajogmf.2024.101425","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>BACKGROUND</h3><p>Both short and long interpregnancy intervals are associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes; however, the impact of interpregnancy intervals on labor progression is unknown.</p></div><div><h3>OBJECTIVE</h3><p>We examined the impact of interpregnancy intervals on the labor curve, hypothesizing that those with a longer interpregnancy intervals would have slower labor progression.</p></div><div><h3>STUDY DESIGN</h3><p>This is a retrospective cohort study of patients with a history of one prior vaginal delivery admitted for induction of labor or spontaneous labor with a singleton gestation ≥37 weeks at an academic medical center between 2004 and 2015. Repeated measures regression was used to construct labor curves, which were compared between patients with short interpregnancy intervals, defined as &lt;3 years since the last delivery, and long interpregnancy intervals, defined as &gt;3 years since the last delivery. We chose this interval as it approximates the median birth interval in the United States. Interval-censored regression was used to estimate the median duration of labor after 4 centimeters of dilation, stratified by type of labor (spontaneous vs induced). Multivariate analysis was used to adjust for potential confounders.</p></div><div><h3>RESULTS</h3><p>Of the 1331 patients who were included in the analysis, 544 (41%) had a long interpregnancy interval. Among the entire cohort, there were no significant differences in first or second-stage progression between short and long interpregnancy interval groups. In the stratified analysis, first-stage progression varied between groups on the basis of labor type: long interpregnancy interval was associated with a slower active phase among those being induced and a quicker active phase among those in spontaneous labor. The second-stage duration was similar between cohorts regardless of labor type.</p></div><div><h3>CONCLUSION</h3><p>Multiparas with an interpregnancy interval &gt;3 years may have a slower active phase than those with a shorter interpregnancy interval when undergoing induction of labor. Interpregnancy interval does not demonstrate an effect on the length of the second stage.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36186,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589933324001514/pdfft?md5=a05077c6a1d570fa65cf060239ae0017&pid=1-s2.0-S2589933324001514-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology Mfm","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589933324001514","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Both short and long interpregnancy intervals are associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes; however, the impact of interpregnancy intervals on labor progression is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

We examined the impact of interpregnancy intervals on the labor curve, hypothesizing that those with a longer interpregnancy intervals would have slower labor progression.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study of patients with a history of one prior vaginal delivery admitted for induction of labor or spontaneous labor with a singleton gestation ≥37 weeks at an academic medical center between 2004 and 2015. Repeated measures regression was used to construct labor curves, which were compared between patients with short interpregnancy intervals, defined as <3 years since the last delivery, and long interpregnancy intervals, defined as >3 years since the last delivery. We chose this interval as it approximates the median birth interval in the United States. Interval-censored regression was used to estimate the median duration of labor after 4 centimeters of dilation, stratified by type of labor (spontaneous vs induced). Multivariate analysis was used to adjust for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Of the 1331 patients who were included in the analysis, 544 (41%) had a long interpregnancy interval. Among the entire cohort, there were no significant differences in first or second-stage progression between short and long interpregnancy interval groups. In the stratified analysis, first-stage progression varied between groups on the basis of labor type: long interpregnancy interval was associated with a slower active phase among those being induced and a quicker active phase among those in spontaneous labor. The second-stage duration was similar between cohorts regardless of labor type.

CONCLUSION

Multiparas with an interpregnancy interval >3 years may have a slower active phase than those with a shorter interpregnancy interval when undergoing induction of labor. Interpregnancy interval does not demonstrate an effect on the length of the second stage.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中孕期间隔与分娩曲线之间的关系。
背景:孕期间隔过短和过长都与不良妊娠结局有关,但孕期间隔对产程的影响尚不清楚:我们研究了孕间隔对产程曲线的影响,假设孕间隔较长的产妇产程进展较慢:这是一项回顾性队列研究,研究对象为 2004 年至 2015 年间在一家学术医疗中心住院的单胎妊娠≥37 周、既往有过一次阴道分娩史的引产或自然分娩患者。我们采用重复测量回归法构建了分娩曲线,并在孕间隔较短的患者之间进行了比较,孕间隔被定义为距最后一次分娩 3 年。我们选择这个间隔,是因为它接近美国的中位生育间隔。根据分娩类型(自然分娩与引产)进行分层,使用区间删失回归估算宫口扩张 4 厘米后的中位分娩持续时间。多变量分析用于调整潜在的混杂因素:在纳入分析的 1331 名患者中,有 544 人(41%)的产程间隔较长。在整个队列中,孕期间隔短和孕期间隔长的组别在第一阶段或第二阶段进展方面没有明显差异。在分层分析中,各组间的第一产程进展因分娩类型而异:长孕周与引产患者的活跃期较慢有关,而与自然分娩患者的活跃期较快有关联。无论分娩类型如何,各组间的第二产程持续时间相似:结论:与孕间期较短的多胎妊娠相比,孕间期大于 3 年的多胎妊娠在接受引产时可能会出现较慢的活跃期。孕间隔对第二产程的长短没有影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
3.20%
发文量
254
审稿时长
40 days
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology (AJOG) is a highly esteemed publication with two companion titles. One of these is the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology Maternal-Fetal Medicine (AJOG MFM), which is dedicated to the latest research in the field of maternal-fetal medicine, specifically concerning high-risk pregnancies. The journal encompasses a wide range of topics, including: Maternal Complications: It addresses significant studies that have the potential to change clinical practice regarding complications faced by pregnant women. Fetal Complications: The journal covers prenatal diagnosis, ultrasound, and genetic issues related to the fetus, providing insights into the management and care of fetal health. Prenatal Care: It discusses the best practices in prenatal care to ensure the health and well-being of both the mother and the unborn child. Intrapartum Care: It provides guidance on the care provided during the childbirth process, which is critical for the safety of both mother and baby. Postpartum Issues: The journal also tackles issues that arise after childbirth, focusing on the postpartum period and its implications for maternal health. AJOG MFM serves as a reliable forum for peer-reviewed research, with a preference for randomized trials and meta-analyses. The goal is to equip researchers and clinicians with the most current information and evidence-based strategies to effectively manage high-risk pregnancies and to provide the best possible care for mothers and their unborn children.
期刊最新文献
Activity restriction and risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes Oxytocin regimen used for induction of labor and pregnancy outcomes. Results of the RE-DINO multicenter randomized trial on the repeated use of vaginal dinoprostone (Propess®) for labor induction in patients at term. Corrigendum to ‘Prevention of preterm birth in twin pregnancies’ American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology MFM/ Volume 4 (2022) 100551 Validation of the PROMIS© Medication Adherence Scale for Pregnant Patients Taking Aspirin.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1