Author
Listed:
- Danni Jiang
- Yang Yang
- Xinxin Zhang
- Xiaocui Nie
Abstract
Objective: To systematically assess the effect of discontinued vs continued oxytocin after active stage of labour is established. Methods: Pubmed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched to 18 April 2021. The risk ratio or mean difference with corresponding 95% confidence interval were computed to investigate the effect of intervention or control on maternal and fetus outcomes. This review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews: CRD42021249635. Results: Discontinuing oxytocin when the active labour was established might decrease the risk of cesarean delivery [RR (95% CI): 0.84 (0.72–0.98), P = 0.02]. However, when we restricted our analysis to women who performed cesarean section after the active phase was reached, the difference was no longer significant [RR (95% CI): 0.82 (0.60–1.10), P = 0.19]. The incidence of uterine tachysystole [RR (95% CI): 0.36 (0.27–0.49)], postpartum hemorrhage [RR (95% CI): 0.78 (0.65–0.93)], and non-reassuring fetal heart rate [RR (95% CI): 0.66 (0.58–0.76)] were significantly lower in the oxytocin discontinuation group. We also found a possible decrease in the risk of chorioamnionitis in discontinued oxytocin group [RR (95% CI): 2.77 (1.02–5.08)]. An increased duration of active [MD (95% CI): 2.28 (2.86–41.71)] and second [MD (95% CI): 5.36 (3.18–7.54)] phase of labour was observed in discontinued oxytocin group, while the total delivery time was not significantly different [MD (95% CI): 20.17 (-24.92–65.26)]. Conclusion: After the active labor is reached, discontinuation of oxytocin could be considered a new recommendation for the improved maternal and fetal outcomes without delaying labour.
Suggested Citation
Danni Jiang & Yang Yang & Xinxin Zhang & Xiaocui Nie, 2022.
"Continued versus discontinued oxytocin after the active phase of labor: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(5), pages 1-18, May.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0267461
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0267461
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0267461. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.