section name header

Evidence summaries

Internal Versus External Tocodynamometry during Induced or Augmented Labour

There may be no difference between internal or external tocodynamometry during induced or augmented labour for any of the maternal or neonatal outcomes. Level of evidence: "C"

Comment: The quality of evidence is downgraded by study quality (unclear allocation concealment and blinding in two of the three trials) and by imprecise results (limited study size for each comparison).

Summary

A Cochrane review [Abstract] 1 included 3 studies with a total of 1945 subjects. No serious complications were reported in the trials and no neonatal or maternal deaths occurred. The neonatal outcome was not statistically different between groups: Apgar score less than 7 at five minutes (RR 1.78, 95% CI 0.83 to 3.83; 3 studies, n=1945); umbilical artery pH less than 7.15 (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.79; one study, n=1456); umbilical artery pH less than 7.16 (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.92; one study, n=239); admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.67; 2 studies, n=489); and more than 48 hours hospitalisation (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.20; one study, n=1456). The pooled risk for instrumental delivery (including caesarean section, ventouse and forceps extraction) was not statistically significantly different (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.21; 3 studies, n=1945). Hyperstimulation was reported in 2 studies (n = 489), but there was no statistically significant difference between groups (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.88).

Clinical comments

Note

Date of latest search: 20 June 2013

    References

    • Bakker JJ, Janssen PF, van Halem K et al. Internal versus external tocodynamometry during induced or augmented labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;(8):CD006947. [PubMed]

Primary/Secondary Keywords