• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Elective induction of labor: A prospective observational study.选择性引产:一项前瞻性观察研究。
PLoS One. 2018 Nov 29;13(11):e0208098. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0208098. eCollection 2018.
2
Maternal and newborn outcomes with elective induction of labor at term.足月选择性引产的母婴结局。
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Mar;220(3):273.e1-273.e11. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2019.01.223. Epub 2019 Feb 17.
3
Induction of labor and nulliparity: A nationwide clinical practice pilot evaluation.引产与初产妇:一项全国性临床实践试点评估。
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020 Dec;99(12):1700-1709. doi: 10.1111/aogs.13948. Epub 2020 Jul 27.
4
Term Elective Induction of Labor and Pregnancy Outcomes Among Obese Women and Their Offspring.肥胖女性及其后代的择期引产与妊娠结局
Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Jan;131(1):12-22. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002408.
5
Adverse obstetrical and neonatal outcomes in elective and medically indicated inductions of labor at term.足月选择性引产和医学指征引产的不良产科及新生儿结局
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2013 Nov;26(16):1595-601. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2013.795533. Epub 2013 May 15.
6
Elective cesarean section or not? Maternal age and risk of adverse outcomes at term: a population-based registry study of low-risk primiparous women.是否选择剖宫产?产妇年龄与足月时不良结局风险:一项基于人群的低风险初产妇登记研究。
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2016 Aug 17;16:230. doi: 10.1186/s12884-016-1028-3.
7
Maternal perceptions of the experience of attempted labor induction and medically elective inductions: analysis of survey results from listening to mothers in California.产妇对引产尝试及医学选择性引产经历的看法:对加利福尼亚州倾听母亲心声调查结果的分析
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020 Aug 12;20(1):458. doi: 10.1186/s12884-020-03137-x.
8
A comparison of obstetrical outcomes with labor induction agents used at term.足月使用引产药物的产科结局比较。
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014 Apr;27(6):592-6. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2013.831066. Epub 2013 Aug 27.
9
Bishop score and risk of cesarean delivery after induction of labor in nulliparous women.初产妇引产术后的 Bishop 评分与剖宫产风险
Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Apr;105(4):690-7. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000152338.76759.38.
10
Term Labor Induction and Cesarean Delivery Risk among Obese Women with and without Comorbidities.肥胖合并与不合并并存病产妇的足月引产与剖宫产分娩风险。
Am J Perinatol. 2022 Jan;39(2):154-164. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1714422. Epub 2020 Jul 28.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparison of pregnancy outcomes between induction of labor at 40 weeks and 41 weeks in low-risk women with Singleton pregnancies: a retrospective cohort study.单胎妊娠低风险女性在40周和41周引产的妊娠结局比较:一项回顾性队列研究。
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2025 May 17;25(1):586. doi: 10.1186/s12884-025-07691-0.
2
Sleep disturbances in late pregnancy: associations with induction of labor.妊娠晚期睡眠障碍:与引产的关联。
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2024 Oct;310(4):2045-2053. doi: 10.1007/s00404-024-07492-4. Epub 2024 Apr 5.
3
Oxytocin-induced birth causes sex-specific behavioral and brain connectivity changes in developing rat offspring.催产素诱导的分娩会导致发育中的大鼠后代出现性别特异性的行为和大脑连接变化。
iScience. 2024 Jan 22;27(2):108960. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2024.108960. eCollection 2024 Feb 16.
4
Comparison of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes between induction and expectant management among women with gestational diabetes mellitus at term pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.比较妊娠期糖尿病足月孕妇引产与期待管理的母婴不良结局:系统评价和荟萃分析。
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2023 Jul 12;23(1):509. doi: 10.1186/s12884-023-05779-z.
5
Offspring school performance at age 12 after induction of labor vs non-intervention at term: A linked cohort study.足月产时引产与非干预分娩对 12 岁子女学业表现的影响:一项关联队列研究。
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2023 Apr;102(4):486-495. doi: 10.1111/aogs.14520. Epub 2023 Feb 22.
6
Trends in labor induction indications: A 20-year population-based study.引产指征的变化趋势:一项基于人群的 20 年研究。
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2022 Dec;101(12):1422-1430. doi: 10.1111/aogs.14447. Epub 2022 Sep 16.
7
Analysis of Variables that Influence the Success Rates of Induction of Labor with Misoprostol: A Retrospective Observational Study.米索前列醇引产成功率影响因素分析:回顾性观察研究。
Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2022 Apr;44(4):327-335. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-1744287. Epub 2022 Apr 26.
8
Recent advances in the induction of labor.引产的最新进展。
F1000Res. 2019 Oct 30;8. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.17587.1. eCollection 2019.

本文引用的文献

1
Births: Final Data for 2014.出生情况:2014年最终数据。
Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2015 Dec;64(12):1-64.
2
Elective induction of labour and maternal request: a national population-based study.选择性引产与产妇要求:一项全国性基于人群的研究。
BJOG. 2016 Dec;123(13):2191-2197. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.13805. Epub 2015 Nov 30.
3
Elective Induction of Labor Compared With Expectant Management of Nulliparous Women at 39 Weeks of Gestation: A Randomized Controlled Trial.妊娠39周初产妇选择性引产与期待管理的比较:一项随机对照试验
Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Dec;126(6):1258-1264. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001154.
4
Changes in induction methods have not influenced cesarean section rates among women with induced labor.引产方法的改变并未影响引产女性的剖宫产率。
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2016 Jan;95(1):112-5. doi: 10.1111/aogs.12809. Epub 2015 Nov 17.
5
Nonmedically indicated induction vs expectant treatment in term nulliparous women.足月未产妇非医学指征引产与期待治疗的比较
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Jan;212(1):103.e1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.06.054. Epub 2014 Jun 28.
6
Elective induction of labor at term compared with expectant management: maternal and neonatal outcomes.选择性足月引产与期待管理的比较:母婴结局。
Obstet Gynecol. 2013 Oct;122(4):761-769. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182a6a4d0.
7
Adverse obstetrical and neonatal outcomes in elective and medically indicated inductions of labor at term.足月选择性引产和医学指征引产的不良产科及新生儿结局
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2013 Nov;26(16):1595-601. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2013.795533. Epub 2013 May 15.
8
Elective induction of labor and the risk of cesarean section in low-risk parous women: a cohort study.择期引产与低危经产妇剖宫产风险的队列研究。
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2013 Feb;92(2):198-203. doi: 10.1111/aogs.12043. Epub 2012 Dec 14.
9
Outcomes of elective induction of labour compared with expectant management: population based study.选择性引产与期待管理的结局比较:基于人群的研究。
BMJ. 2012 May 10;344:e2838. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e2838.
10
Elective induction compared with expectant management in nulliparous women with an unfavorable cervix.选择性引产与期待管理在宫颈条件不佳的初产妇中的比较。
Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Mar;117(3):583-587. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31820caf12.

选择性引产:一项前瞻性观察研究。

Elective induction of labor: A prospective observational study.

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, St. Olav's Hospital, University Hospital of Trondheim, Trondheim, Norway.

Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2018 Nov 29;13(11):e0208098. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0208098. eCollection 2018.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0208098
PMID:30496265
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6264859/
Abstract

The aim of the present study was to assess indications for induction and describe the characteristics and delivery outcome in medical compared to non-medical/elective inductions. During a three-month period, 1663 term inductions were registered in 24 delivery units in Norway. Inclusion criteria were singleton pregnancies with cephalic presentation at gestational age 37+0 and beyond. Indications, pre-induction Bishop scores, mode of delivery and adverse maternal and fetal outcomes were registered, and compared between the medically indicated and elective induction groups. Ten percent of the inductions were elective, and the four most common indications were maternal request (35%), a previous negative delivery experience or difficult obstetric history (19%), maternal fatigue/tiredness (17%) and anxiety (15%). Nearly half of these inductions were performed at 39+0-40+6 weeks. There were fewer nulliparous women in the elective compared to the medically indicated induction group, 16% vs. 52% (p<0.05). The cesarean section rate in the elective induction group was 14% and 17% in the medically indicated group (14% vs. 17%, OR = 0.8, 95% CI 0.5-1.3). We found that one in ten inductions in Norway is performed without a strict medical indication and 86% of these inductions resulted in vaginal delivery.

摘要

本研究的目的是评估引产的指征,并描述医学引产与非医学/选择性引产的特点和分娩结局。在三个月的时间里,挪威的 24 个分娩单位共登记了 1663 例足月引产。纳入标准为单胎妊娠,孕龄 37+0 周及以上,头位。记录了引产指征、引产前的 Bishop 评分、分娩方式以及母婴不良结局,并对医学指征引产组和选择性引产组进行了比较。10%的引产为选择性引产,最常见的四个指征是产妇要求(35%)、上次分娩经历不佳或产科病史困难(19%)、产妇疲劳/疲倦(17%)和焦虑(15%)。近一半的引产在 39+0-40+6 周进行。选择性引产组的初产妇比例低于医学指征引产组,分别为 16%和 52%(p<0.05)。选择性引产组的剖宫产率为 14%,医学指征引产组为 17%(14% vs. 17%,OR = 0.8,95% CI 0.5-1.3)。我们发现,挪威有十分之一的引产没有严格的医学指征,其中 86%的引产是阴道分娩。