Infant outcome following labor induction

Elective induction of labor: a prospective clinical study, I: Obstetric and neonatal effects

“…It may also be possible that the obstetrician feels more responsible for a good result when labor is electively induced: "Having started the woman's labor electively and closely following it to full dilatation with fetal monitoring, the obstetrician may well feel that he can ensure successful delivery by intervening in the second stage as well [22]". The results of the neurological examination of the newborns and of the follow-up study did not reveal any differences between the infants in the two groups, which is in agreement with the results of other studies [6,12]. It is concluded that no somatic obstetric or neonatologic arguments against or in favor of the procedure of elective induction of labor can be derived from the results of this study.…”

Historical cohort study of in utero exposure to uterotonic drugs and cognitive function in young adult life

“…The prevalence of neurological or developmental abnormalities not attributable to events after delivery was the same overall in induced and spontaneous labours, but those abnormalities occurring after induction of labour all followed use of oxytocin 5. Our data indicate that exposure to uterotonic drugs does not substantially affect cognitive function 20years later.…”

Can No-Fault Compensation of Impaired Infants Alleviate the Malpractice Crisis in Obstetrics?

“…But in a study of 591 claims that alleged obstetrical malpractice as the cause of a birth-related neurological injury, Localio and Siege1 ( 1987) found that questionable procedures account for some neurological impairments. The authors reported that some obstetricians continue to use midforceps and rotate the fetus, even though these practices are strongly contested in modem obstetrics (Friedman et al 1979;Hughey et al 1978). Obstetricians used midforceps in 35 of the 587 cases that reported the method of extraction.…”