Abstract
Objective:
To evaluate if a learning curve exists for cervical Foley placement for labor induction in women with unfavorable cervices and whether labor curves differ compared with the dinoprostone insert (PGE2).
Study Design:
We conducted a secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial.
Result:
For Foley and PGE2, successful placement occurred in 157/185 (85%) and 188/191 (98%) women (P<0.001). Unsuccessful Foley placements decreased over time (P=0.005); all occurred at the site previously using PGE2 preferentially. In women with allocated agent placed successfully who achieved complete cervical dilation, median progress with Foley (n=112), compared with PGE2 (n=123), was: 1–3 cm (6.2 vs 14.1 h; P<0.001), 3–6 cm (11.1 vs 6.7 h; P<0.001) and 6–10 cm (1.9 vs 1.5 h; P=0.14).
Conclusion:
There is a learning curve for placing cervical Foley catheters. Despite faster times to delivery, Foley is associated with slower dilation from 3 to 6 cm compared with PGE2.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $21.58 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ, Osterman MJ, Wilson EC, Mathews TJ . Births: final data from 2010. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2012; 61: 1–72.
Alfirevic Z, Kelly AJ, Dowswell T . Intravenous oxytocin alone for cervical ripening and induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009; (4): CD003246.
Facchinett F, Fontanesi F, Del Giovane C . Pre-induction of labour: comparing dinoprostone vaginal insert to repeated prostaglandin administration: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2012; 25: 1965–1969.
Jozwiak M, ten Eikelder M, Oude Rengerink K, de Groot C, Feitsma H, Spaanderman M et al. Foley catheter versus vaginal misoprostol: randomized controlled trial (PROBAAT-M study) and systematic review and meta-analysis of literature. Am J Perinatol 2014; 31: 145–156.
Edwards RK, Szychowski JM, Berger JL, Petersen M, Ingersoll M, Bodea-Braescu AV et al. Foley catheter compared with the controlled-release dinoprostone insert: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2014; 123: 1280–1287.
Scissione AC, Nguyen L, Manley J, Pollock M, Maas B, Colmorgen G . A randomized comparison of transcervical Foley catheter to intravaginal misoprostol for preinduction cervical ripening. Obstet Gynecol 2001; 97: 603–607.
Guinn DA, Davies JK, Jones RO, Sullivan L, Wolf D . Labor induction in women with an unfavorable Bishop score: randomized controlled trial of intrauterine Foley catheter with concurrent oxytocin infusions versus Foley catheter with extra-amniotic saline infusion with concurrent oxytocin infusion. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 191: 225–229.
Chung JH, Huang WH, Rumney PJ, Garite TJ, Nageotte MP . A prospective randomized controlled trial that compared misoprostol, Foley catheter, and combination misoprostol-Foley catheter for labor induction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 189: 1031–1035.
Harper LM, Caughey AB, Odibo AO, Roehl KA, Zhao Q, Cahill AG . Normal progress of induced labor. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 119: 1113–1118.
Zhang J, Troendle JF, Yancey MK . Reassessing the labor curve in nulliparous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 187: 824–828.
Zhang J, Landy HJ, Branch DW, Burkman R, Haberman S, Gregory KD et al. Contemporary patterns of spontaneous labor with normal neonatal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol 2010; 116: 1281–1287.
Vahratian A, Hoffman MK, Troendle JF, Zhang J . The impact of parity on course of labor in a contemporary population. Birth 2006; 33: 12–17.
Tuuli MG, Keegan MB, Odibo AO, Roehl K, Macones GA, Cahill AG . Progress of labor in women induced with misoprostol versus the Foley catheter. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 209: 237.e1–e7.
Spong CY, Berghella V, Wenstrom KD, Mercer BM, Saade GR . Preventing the first cesarean delivery: summary of a joint Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists workshop. Obstet Gynecol 2012; 120: 1181–1193.
Acknowledgements
All work was performed by the listed authors supported by departmental funds.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Additional information
These data were presented in part at the 35th annual meeting of the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine in San Diego, CA, USA on February 7, 2015.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Edwards, R., Szychowski, J., Bodea-Braescu, A. et al. Foley catheter for induction of labor: potential barriers to adopting the technique. J Perinatol 35, 996–999 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/jp.2015.123
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/jp.2015.123