COMPARISON OF PROGRESSION OF SPONTANEOUS VERSUS INDUCED LABOR IN PRIMI AND MULTIPAROUS WOMEN

  • MADAN A
  • SHARMA S
  • YEDLA Y
  • et al.
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objectives: The objectives of the study were to compare progression of spontaneous versus induced labor in primigravida and multigravida women. Methods: Pregnant women admitted in Labor room of Bebe Nanaki mother and Child Care Centre, Amritsar during April 2019–March 2020 were selected for this study. A total of 200 pregnant women were selected and divided into two groups. Women in group A were induced while in group B were women with spontaneous onset of labor. Labor progression in both was compared. Results: In group A, the mean duration of the active phase in primigravida was 4.08±2.30 h and in multigravida was 4.02±2.20 h. In group B, the mean duration of active phase in primigravidas was 7.24±1.39 h and in multigravidas was 6.48±1.40 h. In group A, the mean duration of the second stage in a primigravida was 25.5±8.15 min and in a multigravida was 17.38±9.95 min. In group B, the mean duration of the second stage in a primigravida was 41.3±9.6 min, while in a multigravida was 22.72±6.2 h. Discussion: The mean duration of active phase in group A in the primigravida and multigravida was almost similar, showing that induction does not have any effect on the duration of active phase. The mean duration of the second stage of group A in primigravida was 25 min and multipara was 17 min showing that induction reduces the duration of the second stage. Conclusion: Induction of labor when done at the right gestational age for correct indication is beneficial to women as it reduces the complications caused due to the continuation of high-risk pregnancies.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

MADAN, A., SHARMA, S., YEDLA, Y., & KAUR, J. (2021). COMPARISON OF PROGRESSION OF SPONTANEOUS VERSUS INDUCED LABOR IN PRIMI AND MULTIPAROUS WOMEN. Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research, 148–151. https://doi.org/10.22159/ajpcr.2021.v14i6.41439

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free