Magnitude Of Birth Outcome After Induced Labor Among Mothers Delivered In Nigist Eleni Mohammed Memorial Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, Hosanna Town, Hadiya Zone, Southern Ethiopia. Cross-Sectional Study

Abstract

Background. “Induction of labor is not risk free, despite its importance for ending risky pregnancy compare to spontaneous onset of labor it has potential harms and it increases the rate of different maternal and neonatal complications.” Due to this WHO recommends IOL with only clear medical indications when the benefit more significant than potential harms. Even though there is a few study on IOL that address magnitude of birth outcome after IOL no study is found that determine the contributing factors to birth outcomes after IOL in Ethiopia especially in my study area, therefore the factors that affect the birth outcome after IOL need to be clearly understood. Objective: To assess the magnitude birth outcome after induced labor and associated factor among child bearing mother who deliver in NEMMCSH in the last two years (January 01, 2019 to December 31, 2020 GC). Data was collected from June 25 to July 09, 2021 GC. Methods: Hospital based retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted on 778 study participants selected by systematic random sampling technique among all child bearing mothers delivered by induction in NEMMCSH from January 01, 2019 to December 31, 2020 GC. Data was collected from patient cards, delivery registration log books and operation note books. Then data were entered and coded using EPI data version 3.1 and analyzed using SPSS version 25. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was carried out to determine the association different potential factors with the birth outcome after IOL. Independent predictors were determined using adjusted odd ratio with 95% CL at p value < 0.05 in multivariate logistic regression analysis. Results: In this study the magnitude of still birth after IOL was 9.6%. Rural residence [AOR=3.59; 95%CI:(1.32, 9.80)], maternal chronic medical diseases [AOR=3.58; 95% CL: (1.23, 10.41)], history of previous still birth [AOR=7.45; 95%CI: (2.45, 22.38)], Partograph use [AOR=0.034; 95%CI: 0.01,0.09)], delivering < 8 hours[AOR=0.13; 95%CI: (0.03,0.56)] and delivering within 8-16[AOR=0.28; 95%CI:(0.10, 0.76)] hours were significant predictors for still birth. Conclusions: The magnitude of still birth after IOL was relatively high in the study area. Variables which increase the likelihood of still birth were, living in rural area and previous history of still birth. The recommendations also forwarded for health care provider, NEMMCSH, different stakeholders and for researchers.