To assess whether obstetric outcomes among women managed with elective induction of labor compared to expectant management at 39 weeks of gestation vary based on maternal age. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of singleton, non-anomalous, deliveries in California between 2007-2011 to assess outcomes among nulliparous women undergoing elective induction of labor at 39 weeks of gestation compared with expectant management. We defined elective induction of labor as induction of labor without medical indication and women with planned cesarean sections were excluded. Maternal race/ethnicity, pre-pregnancy body mass index, educational attainment, public health insurance, and smoking status were assessed as potential confounders. Chi-squared and multivariable logistic regression analyses were employed for statistical comparisons and a p-value of less than 0.05 was used to indicate statistical significance. In our cohort, women 20-34 years and ≥35 years undergoing elective induction of labor have a lower adjusted odds of cesarean section and a higher adjusted odds of operative vaginal delivery compared to expectant management. Women <20 years and 20-34 years undergoing elective induction of labor have a lower adjusted odds of postpartum hemorrhage and chorioamnionitis, and their neonates have a lower adjusted odds of NICU admission. Compared to expectant management, neonates of women <20 years and women 20-34 years undergoing elective induction had a lower odds ratio of respiratory distress. There were no statistically meaningful differences by age between the elective induction and expectant management regarding severe maternal morbidity or lacerations. Our study demonstrates that obstetric outcomes vary when stratified by age in women undergoing elective induction of labor at 39 weeks’ gestation compared to expectant management. These findings illustrate the importance of understanding age-related differences in outcomes associated with elective induction of labor.
Read full abstract