Review: Pengaruh Faktor Risiko Terhadap Induksi Persalinan

Review: The Effect of Risk Factors on Induction of Labor

Authors

  • Esmaya R. A. Adaniyah Universitas Mulawarman
  • Endang Sawitri Laboratorium Fisiologi, Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Mulawarman
  • Erwin Ginting Laboratorium Ilmu Kebidanan dan Kandungan, Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Mulawarman

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25026/jsk.v3i6.401

Keywords:

induksi persalinan, usia maternal, jumlah paritas, indeks massa tubuh, skor Bishop

Abstract

Abstract

Induction of labor has become one of the most common interventions in modern obstetrics, with an increasing number of pregnant women worldwide that received labor induction interventions to deliver their babies. Labor induction was influenced by several risk factors. This systematic review study aimed to evaluate the influence of risk factors against induction of labor. Searches were performed by searching articles using electronic databases or search engine i.e Pubmed, Clinical Key, Google Scholar, Research Gate, or Science Direct that were limited to studies published between 2015 and 2020 in English and Indonesian Language. 270 studies was found and 48 studies were selected based on the inclusion criteria. The results of this systematic reviews showed that maternal age was not affecting labor induction in 71.1% of the studies evaluated, parity was affecting labor induction in 90% of the studies, body mass index was affecting labor induction in 66.7% of the studies, and Bishop Score was affecting labor induction in 90.3% of the studies. It can be concluded that maternal age was not affecting induction of labor, but labor induction were influenced by parity, body mass index and Bishop score in the majority of the included studies.

Abstrak

Induksi persalinan telah menjadi salah satu intervensi yang paling umum dalam kebidanan modern, dimana semakin banyak wanita hamil di seluruh dunia yang menerima intervensi induksi persalinan untuk melahirkan bayi mereka. Induksi persalinan dipengaruhi oleh beberapa faktor risiko. Systematic review ini bertujuan untuk mengevaluasi bagaimana pengaruh faktor risiko terhadap induksi persalinan. Systematic review ini dilakukan dengan pencarian studi pada database atau search engine yang dapat diakses seperti Pubmed, Clinical Key, Google Scholar, Research Gate, atau Science Direct, dan dibatasi terbitan tahun 2015-2020 dalam Bahasa Indonesia dan Bahasa Inggris. Hasil pencarian diperoleh sebanyak 270 studi dan tersisa 48 studi yang memenuhi kriteria inklusi. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan usia maternal tidak mempengaruhi induksi persalinan pada 71,1% hasil studi, jumlah paritas mempengaruhi induksi persalinan pada 90 % hasil studi, indeks massa tubuh mempengaruhi induksi persalinan pada 66,7% hasil studi, dan skor Bishop mempengaruhi induksi persalinan pada 90,3% hasil studi. Disimpulkan bahwa usia maternal tidak mempengaruhi induksi persalinan, tetapi jumlah paritas, indeks massa tubuh dan skor Bishop mempengaruhi induksi persalinan pada sebagian besar studi yang diinklusi

References

1. Goel K, Gedam J, Rajput D, Bhalerao M. Induction of Labor: A Review. Indian J ClinPract. 2014;24(11):1057–64.
2. Al-Shaikh GK, Wahabi HA, Fayed AA, Esmaeil SA, Al-Malki GA. Factors associated with successful induction of labor. Saudi Med J. 2012;33(3):298–303.
3. WHO. WHO recommendations: Induction of labour at or beyond term [Internet]. WHO recommendations: Induction of labour at or beyond term. 2018. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30629393
4. Vogel JP, Souza JP, Gülmezoglu AM. Patterns and Outcomes of Induction of Labour in Africa and Asia: A Secondary Analysis of the WHO Global Survey on Maternal and
Neonatal Health. PLoS One. 2013;8(6).
5. Coates D, Homer C, Wilson A, Deady L, Mason E, Foureur M, et al. Induction of labour indications and timing: A systematic analysis of clinical guidelines. Women and Birth [Internet]. 2019;
6. Anggriani DD, Herawati L, Ernawati E. Parity as failure determinants of labor induction in Bangka Belitung. Maj Obstet Ginekol. 2016;24(3):79.
7. Bassetty KC, Ahmed RD. Failed induction of labor (IOL): an overview regarding obstetric outcome and its significance in a health resource poor setting over a period of 11 months. Int J Reprod Contraception, Obstet Gynecol. 2017;6(8):3646.
8. Khan NB, Ahmed I, Malik A, Sheikh L. Factors associated with failed induction of labour in a secondary care hospital. J Pak Med Assoc. 2012;62(1):6–10.
9. Frederiks F, Lee S, Dekker G. Risk factors for failed induction in nulliparous women. J Matern Neonatal Med. 2012;25(12):2479–87.
10. Lockwood C, Oh EG. Systematic reviews?: Guidelines , tools and checklists for authors. Nurs Heal Sci. 2017;273–7.
11. Mccoy J, Downes KL, Srinivas SK, Levine LD, Mccoy J, Downes KL, et al. Postdates induction with an unfavorable cervix and risk of cesarean Postdates induction with an unfavorable cervix and risk of cesarean Ã. J Matern Neonatal Med [Internet]. 2018;0(0):1–5
12. Ronzoni S, Rosen H, Farine D, Maxwell C. Maternal Obesity Class as a Predictor of Induction Failure?: A Practical Risk Assessment Tool. Am J Perinatol. 2015;1(212):1298–304.
13. Quinones JN, Kwakye-ackah G, Burger A, Kainz G, Vega GD La. Induction of Labor in Women of Advanced Maternal Age. Poster Present Soc Matern Fetal Med 37th Annu Pregnancy Meet. 2017;
14. Levine LD, Downes KL, Parry S, Elovitz MA, Sammel MD, Srinivas SK. A validated calculator to estimate risk of cesarean after an induction of labor with an unfavorable cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol [Internet]. 2018;218(2):254.e1-254.e7.
15. Jochum F, Ray C Le, Blanc-petitjean P, Langer B. Externally Validated Score to Predict Cesarean Delivery After Labor Induction With Cervical Ripening. Am Coll Obstet Gynecol. 2019;134(3):502–10.
16. Mariani LL, Mancarella M, Fuso L, Novara L, Menato G, Biglia N. Predictors of response after a second attempt of pharmacological labor induction?: a retrospective study. Arch Gynecol Obstet [Internet]. 2020;(0123456789).
17. Nwabuobi C, Gowda N, Schmitz J, Wood N, Pargas A, Bagiardi L, et al. Risk factors for Cesarean delivery in pregnancy with small-for-gestational-age fetus undergoing induction of labor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2020;55(August 2019):799–805.
18. Teefey CP, Reforma L, Koelper NC, Sammel MD, Srinivas SK, Levine LD, et al. Risk Factors Associated With Cesarean Delivery After Induction of Labor in Women With Class III Obesity. Am Coll Obstet Gynecol. 2020;135(3):542–9.
19. Highley LL, Previs RA, Dotters-katz SK, Brancazio LR, Grotegut CA. Cesarean delivery among women with prolonged labor induction. J Perinat Med. 2015;
20. Ellis JA, Brown CM, Barger B, Carlson NS. Influence of Maternal Obesity on Labor Induction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Midwifery Women’s Heal. 2019;64(1):55–67.
21. Hurissa BF, Geta M, Belachew T. Prevalence of Failed Induction of Labor and Associated Factors Among Women Delivered in Hawassa Public Health Facilities, Ethiopia, 2015. J Womens Heal Care. 2015;04(05).
22. Kerbage Y, Senat M V, Drumez E, Subtil D, Vayssiere C, Deruelle P. Risk factors for failed induction of labor among pregnant women with Class III obesity. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2020;(November 2019):637–43.
23. Hadar E, Hiersch L, Ashwal E, Chen R, Wiznitzer A, Gabbay-Benziv R. Induction of labor in elderly nulliparous women. J Matern Neonatal Med [Internet]. 2016;30(18):2146–50.
24. Dunn L, Kumar S, Beckmann M. Maternal age is a risk factor for caesarean section following induction of labour. Aust New Zeal J Obstet Gynaecol. 2017;1–6.
25. Crankshaw DJ, Brien YMO, Crosby DA, Morrison JJ. Maternal Age and Contractility of Human Myometrium in Pregnancy. 2015;1–7.
26. Feghali M, Timofeev J, Huang C, Driggers R, Miodovnik M, Landy HJ, et al. Preterm Induction of Labor: Predictors of Vaginal Delivery and Labor Curves. Am J Obstet Gynecol [Internet]. 2015;
27. Dammer U, Bogner R, Weiss C, Faschingbauer F, Pretscher J, Beckmann MW, et al. Influence of body mass index on induction of labor?: A historical cohort study. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2018;1–11.
28. Gibson KS, Waters TP. Measures of success: Prediction of successful labor induction. Semin Perinatol [Internet]. 2015;39(6):475–82.
29. O’Brien CM, Thomas G, Newton JM, Reese J. In vivo Raman spectroscopy for biochemical monitoring of the cervix throughout pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol [Internet]. 2018
30. Ryan GA, Nicholson SM, Crankshaw DJ, Ryan GA. Maternal parity and functional contractility of human myometrium in vitro in the third trimester of pregnancy. J Perinatol [Internet]. 2019;439–44.
31. Maged AM, El AM, Heba S, Doaa MM, Ayman SB, Mohammad H, et al. Effect of maternal obesity on labor induction in postdate pregnancy. Arch Gynecol Obstet [Internet]. 2018;(0123456789).
32. Khazardoost S, Ghotbizadeh F, Latifi S, Tahani M, Ali M. The Predictive Value of Trans-Vaginal Ultrasound Measurements Compared with Bishop Score in Determining Successful Induction of Labor. J Obstet Gynecol Cancer Res. 2016;1(2):1–7.
33. Prendergast C. Maternal phenotype?: how do age , obesity and diabetes affect myometrial function? Curr Opin Psychol [Internet]. 2020;13:108–16.
34. Lassiter JR, Holliday N, Lewis DF, Mulekar M, Brocato B, Lassiter JR, et al. Induction of labor with an unfavorable cervix?: how does BMI affect success?? Induction of labor with an unfavorable cervix?: how does BMI affect success?? z. J Matern Neonatal Med. 2015;7058(January 2016).
35. Yousuf F, Naru T, Sheikh S. Effect of body mass index on outcome of labour induction. J Pak Med Assoc. 2016;66(5):598–601.
36. Roloff K, Peng S, Sanchez-Ramos L, Valenzuela GJ. Cumulative oxytocin dose during induction of labor according to maternal body mass index. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2015;131(1):54–8.
37. Chaemsaithong P, Kwan AHW, Tse WT, Lim WT, Chan WWY, Chong KC, et al. Factors that affect ultrasound-determined labor progress in women undergoing induction of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol [Internet]. 2019;220(6):592.e1-592.e15.
38. TITILAYO R-OS. PREDICTING OUTCOME OF LABOUR INDUCTION USING SONOGRAPHIC CERVICAL LENGTH AND BISHOP SCORE AT UNIVERSITY OF ILORIN TEACHING HOSPITAL. 2017.
39. Kaoian V, Luangdansakul W, Wacharasint P. Transvaginal sonographic cervical length versus bishop score in labor induction to predict the risk of cesarean delivery: A comparison study. J Med Assoc Thail. 2018;101(2):157–61.
40. Anikwe CC, Okorochukwu BC, Uchendu E, Ikeoha CC. The Effect of Ultrasound- Measured Preinduction Cervical Length on Delivery Outcome in a Low-Resource Setting. 2020;2020(Cl).
41. Navve D, Orenstein N, Ribak R, Daykan Y. Is the Bishop-score significant in predicting the success of labor induction in multiparous women?? J Perinatol [Internet].2017;(June 2016):1–4.

Downloads

Published

2021-12-31

How to Cite

Adaniyah, E. R. A., Sawitri, E., & Ginting, E. (2021). Review: Pengaruh Faktor Risiko Terhadap Induksi Persalinan: Review: The Effect of Risk Factors on Induction of Labor. Jurnal Sains Dan Kesehatan, 3(6), 909–916. https://doi.org/10.25026/jsk.v3i6.401