» Articles » PMID: 30786997

Induction of Labour at 41 Weeks Versus Expectant Management Until 42 Weeks (INDEX): Multicentre, Randomised Non-inferiority Trial

Abstract

Objective: To compare induction of labour at 41 weeks with expectant management until 42 weeks in low risk women.

Design: Open label, randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.

Setting: 123 primary care midwifery practices and 45 hospitals (secondary care) in the Netherlands, 2012-16.

Participants: 1801 low risk women with an uncomplicated singleton pregnancy: randomised to induction (n=900) or to expectant management until 42 weeks (n=901).

Interventions: Induction at 41 weeks or expectant management until 42 weeks with induction if necessary.

Primary Outcome Measures: Primary outcome was a composite of perinatal mortality and neonatal morbidity (Apgar score <7 at five minutes, arterial pH <7.05, meconium aspiration syndrome, plexus brachialis injury, intracranial haemorrhage, and admission to a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Secondary outcomes included maternal outcomes and mode of delivery. The null hypothesis that expectant management is inferior to induction was tested with a non-inferiority margin of 2%.

Results: Median gestational age at delivery was 41 weeks+0 days (interquartile range 41 weeks+0 days-41 weeks+1 day) for the induction group and 41 weeks+2 days (41 weeks+0 days-41 weeks+5 days) for the expectant management group. The primary outcome was analysed for both the intention-to-treat population and the per protocol population. In the induction group, 15/900 (1.7%) women had an adverse perinatal outcome versus 28/901 (3.1%) in the expectant management group (absolute risk difference -1.4%, 95% confidence interval -2.9% to 0.0%, P=0.22 for non-inferiority). 11 (1.2%) infants in the induction group and 23 (2.6%) in the expectant management group had an Apgar score <7 at five minutes (relative risk (RR) 0.48, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.98). No infants in the induction group and three (0.3%) in the expectant management group had an Apgar score <4 at five minutes. One fetal death (0.1%) occurred in the induction group and two (0.2%) in the expectant management group. No neonatal deaths occurred. 3 (0.3%) neonates in the induction group versus 8 (0.9%) in the expectant management group were admitted to an NICU (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.41). No significant difference was found in composite adverse maternal outcomes (induction n=122 (13.6%) expectant management n=102 (11.3%)) or in caesarean section rate (both groups n=97 (10.8%)).

Conclusions: This study could not show non-inferiority of expectant management compared with induction of labour in women with uncomplicated pregnancies at 41 weeks; instead a significant difference of 1.4% was found for risk of adverse perinatal outcomes in favour of induction, although the chances of a good perinatal outcome were high with both strategies and the incidence of perinatal mortality, Apgar score <4 at five minutes, and NICU admission low.

Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register NTR3431.

Citing Articles

Which variables are associated with recruitment failure? A nationwide review on obstetrical and gynaecological multicentre RCTs (2003-2023).

Rikken J, Casteleijn R, van der Weide M, Duijnhoven R, Goddijn M, Mol B BMJ Open. 2025; 15(1):e087766.

PMID: 39842920 PMC: 11784333. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-087766.


Maternal and perinatal outcomes after implementation of a more active management in late- and postterm pregnancies in Sweden: A population-based cohort study.

Kallen K, Norman M, Elvander C, Bergh C, Sengpiel V, Hagberg H PLoS Med. 2025; 22(1):e1004504.

PMID: 39820829 PMC: 11737695. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004504.


Maternal postpartum infection risk following induction of labor: A Danish national cohort study.

Hogh-Poulsen S, Carlsen S, Bendix J, Clausen T, Lokkegaard E, Axelsson P Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2024; 104(2):309-318.

PMID: 39737539 PMC: 11782083. DOI: 10.1111/aogs.15035.


Comparison of balloon catheter, oral misoprostol, or combination of both for cervical ripening in late-term and post-term nulliparous women: A Finnish randomized controlled multicenter pilot trial.

Kruit H, Place K, Vayrynen K, Orden M, Tekay A, Vaarasmaki M Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2024; 104(2):389-399.

PMID: 39673223 PMC: 11782065. DOI: 10.1111/aogs.15034.


Trends in gestational age at live birth in Scotland from 2005 to 2019: a population-based study.

Moore E, Scott S, John J, Calvert C, Wood R, Stock S Wellcome Open Res. 2024; 9:254.

PMID: 39494194 PMC: 11530745. DOI: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.20916.2.


References
1.
Bodner-Adler B, Bodner K, Kimberger O, Lozanov P, Husslein P, Mayerhofer K . Influence of the birth attendant on maternal and neonatal outcomes during normal vaginal delivery: a comparison between midwife and physician management. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2004; 116(11-12):379-84. DOI: 10.1007/BF03040917. View

2.
Hannah M, Hannah W, Hellmann J, Hewson S, Milner R, Willan A . Induction of labor as compared with serial antenatal monitoring in post-term pregnancy. A randomized controlled trial. The Canadian Multicenter Post-term Pregnancy Trial Group. N Engl J Med. 1992; 326(24):1587-92. DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199206113262402. View

3.
Gelisen O, Caliskan E, Dilbaz S, Dilbaz B, Ozdas E, Haberal A . Induction of labor with three different techniques at 41 weeks of gestation or spontaneous follow-up until 42 weeks in women with definitely unfavorable cervical scores. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2005; 120(2):164-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2004.08.013. View

4.
Nakling J, Backe B . Pregnancy risk increases from 41 weeks of gestation. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2006; 85(6):663-8. DOI: 10.1080/00016340500543733. View

5.
Zeitlin J, Blondel B, Alexander S, Breart G . Variation in rates of postterm birth in Europe: reality or artefact?. BJOG. 2007; 114(9):1097-103. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01328.x. View