Outpatient versus inpatient induction of labour for improving birth outcomes

  • Protocol
  • Intervention

Authors

  • Anthony J Kelly,

    Corresponding author
    1. Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Brighton, UK
    • Anthony J Kelly, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, Royal Sussex County Hospital, Eastern Road, Brighton, BN2 5BE, UK. tony.kelly@bsuh.nhs.uk.

    Search for more papers by this author
  • Zarko Alfirevic,

    1. The University of Liverpool, School of Reproductive and Developmental Medicine, Division of Perinatal and Reproductive Medicine, Liverpool, UK
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Therese Dowswell

    1. The University of Liverpool , Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group, School of Reproductive and Developmental Medicine, Division of Perinatal and Reproductive Medicine, Liverpool, UK
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows:

  1. The primary objective of this review is to assess the effects on maternal and neonatal outcomes of cervical ripening or third trimester induction of labour for women managed as outpatients compared to inpatient management.

  2. A secondary objective of the review is to determine whether the effects on maternal and neonatal outcomes are influenced by predefined clinical subgroups including the effect of parity, membrane status (intact or ruptured) and cervical status (unfavourable, favourable or undefined).

  3. This review will not attempt to compare the relative effects of different methods of induction of labour on maternal and neonatal outcomes within an outpatient setting. This will be the topic of a separate review.