Evaluation of breast stimulation for induction of labor in women with a prior cesarean section and in grandmultiparas

Segal, Shmuel; Gemer, Ofer; Zohav, Efraim; Siani, Moshe; Sassoon, Essi

doi:10.3109/00016349509009941

Cited by 11 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since our study is retrospective, it is not possible to determine what occurred first. A retrospective research study found that stimulation of the nipples in women with previous births and previous caesarean section is a safe and effective method [18]. In our study, augmentation increased the risk of dehiscence, thus evaluation of the scar is mandatory before any type of augmentation is implemented, and close surveillance is crucial if augmentation is given.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 62%

Dehiscence of cesarean section scar during pregnancy and delivery — risk factors

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: We wanted to identify risk factors for dehiscence of cesarean section (CS) scars in patients undergoing repeated cesarean section. Material and methods: This was a retrospective case-control study over a 3-year period in our medical center (2011-2014), comparing women who had repeated CS without complications and women diagnosed with dehiscence. Data were collected from medical records and the groups were compared for demographic and obstetrical data. Results: Dehiscence was identified in 27 women, while 54 women without dehiscence were the control group. Statistically significant differences were found in the need for augmentation, the number of previous cesarean sections, cesarean section in the active phase of labor and length of hospitalization. Discussion: The need for augmentation of labor, CS in the nonactive stage and more than one cesarean section, all increased the risk of dehiscence. There was no association between dehiscence and scar pain, time elapsed since the previous cesarean section, the method of wound closure or fever.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 62%

Dehiscence of cesarean section scar during pregnancy and delivery — risk factors

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The usefulness of breast stimulation in high risk pregnancies including grand multiparas and previous Cesarean has been studied and found to be efficacious, but safety in these patients needs further evaluation [13]. We did not include high risk patients in our study group for uniformity of data.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Breast Stimulation in Low-Risk Primigravidas at Term: Does It Aid in Spontaneous Onset of Labour and Vaginal Delivery? A Pilot Study

Singh

Tripathi

Mala

et al. 2014

BioMed Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims. The aim of the study was to elicit the safety and efficacy of breast stimulation as an intervention to prevent postdatism and as an aid in spontaneous onset of labour. Methods. Primigravidas with cephalic presentation, without any high-risk factor, were recruited between 36 to 38 weeks of gestation. 200 patients were recruited and randomized into two groups (n = 100). Breast stimulation was advised to one group but not to the other group. Bishop's scoring was done at 38 weeks and repeated at 39 weeks of gestation. Maternal and fetal outcomes were compared in two groups. Result. Bishop's score changed from 3.12 (±1.01) to 3.9 (±1.08) in control group and from 3.02 (±0.82) to 6.08 (±1.29) in breast stimulation group after one week (P value < 0.0001). The period of gestation at delivery was 39.5 (±2.3) weeks in control group and 39.2 (±2.8) weeks in intervention group (P value: 0.044). There were increased chances of vaginal delivery in intervention group (P value: 0.046). Duration of labor, hyperstimulation, presence of meconium stained liquor, postpartum hemorrhage, and neonatal outcomes were similar in both groups. Conclusion. Breast stimulation in low-risk primigravidas helps in cervical ripening and increases chances of vaginal delivery.

show abstract

“…One method that may be effective is the use of nipple stimulation, which may increase native oxytocin secretion. One prospective study examined the efficacy of nipple stimulation in cervical ripening and labor induction and found a significant difference in women who used this method versus those who did not (10). Another retrospective study found that women who performed nipple stimulation had higher rates of successful induction and subsequent vaginal deliveries (11).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Women’s Use of Nonprescribed Methods to Induce Labor: A Brief Report

Chaudhry

Fischer

Schaffir

2011

Birth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Evaluation of breast stimulation for induction of labor in women with a prior cesarean section and in grandmultiparas

Abstract: Breast stimulation in grandmultiparas and in women with a previous cesarean section is efficacious and safe.

Cited by 11 publications

References 0 publications

Dehiscence of cesarean section scar during pregnancy and delivery — risk factors

Dehiscence of cesarean section scar during pregnancy and delivery — risk factors

Breast Stimulation in Low-Risk Primigravidas at Term: Does It Aid in Spontaneous Onset of Labour and Vaginal Delivery? A Pilot Study

Women’s Use of Nonprescribed Methods to Induce Labor: A Brief Report

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About