Interaction between Maternal Obesity and Bishop Score in Predicting Successful Induction of Labor in Term, Nulliparous Patients

 

 Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective Determine the Bishop score most predictive of induction of labor (IOL) success for different maternal weight groups.

Study Design Retrospective cohort study. Prospectively collected database utilized to determine the optimum Bishop score within each prepregnancy body mass index (BMI) category of term, nulliparous patients undergoing IOL.

Results For the total group (n = 696), Bishop score ≥5 was most predictive of success (75% versus 56%, p < 0.0001). Within each BMI category, Bishop score ≥5 remained most predictive: normal weight (79% versus 64%, p < 0.01); overweight (72% versus 58%, p = 0.03); and obese (73% versus 45%, p < 0.0001). Overall, nonobese patients had more success than obese patients (70% versus 59%, p < 0.01). The nonobese group had more success than the obese group when the Bishop score was <3 (57% versus 39%, p < 0.05) but not when it was ≥3 (72% versus 65%, p = 0.1). Also, there was a higher fraction of patients with Bishop score <3 in the obese group compared with the nonobese group (25% versus 14%, p < 0.001).

Conclusion The optimum Bishop score for predicting successful IOL in nulliparous patients was 5 regardless of BMI class. The higher IOL failure rate observed in obese women was associated with lower starting Bishop scores and was compounded by higher failure rates in obese women with Bishop scores <3.

Note

The views expressed in this study are those of the authors and are not to be construed as official or reflecting the views of the Department of the Army or the Department of Defense.

• References

• 1 Ogden CL, Carroll MD, Curtin LR, McDowell MA, Tabak CJ, Flegal KM. Prevalence of overweight and obesity in the United States, 1999–2004. JAMA 2006; 295: 1549-1555
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Tilton Z, Hodgson MI, Donoso E, Arteaga A, Rosso P. Complications and outcome of pregnancy in obese women. Nutrition 1989; 5: 95-99
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Crane SS, Wojtowycz MA, Dye TD, Aubry RH, Artal R. Association between pre-pregnancy obesity and the risk of cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 89: 213-216
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Kliegman RM, Gross T. Perinatal problems of the obese mother and her infant. Obstet Gynecol 1985; 66: 299-306
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 LaCoursiere DY, Bloebaum L, Duncan JD, Varner MW. Population-based trends and correlates of maternal overweight and obesity, Utah 1991–2001. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 192: 832-839
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Isaacs JD, Magann EF, Martin RW, Chauhan SP, Morrison JC. Obstetric challenges of massive obesity complicating pregnancy. J Perinatol 1994; 14: 10-14
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Perlow JH, Morgan MA. Massive maternal obesity and perioperative cesarean morbidity. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1994; 170: 560-565
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Chu SY, Kim SY, Schmid CH , et al. Maternal obesity and risk of cesarean delivery: a meta-analysis. Obes Rev 2007; 8: 385-394
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Weiss JL, Malone FD, Emig D , et al; FASTER Research Consortium. Obesity, obstetric complications and cesarean delivery rate—a population-based screening study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 190: 1091-1097
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Johnson JW, Longmate JA, Frentzen B. Excessive maternal weight and pregnancy outcome. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1992; 167: 353-370 ; discussion 370–372
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Pi-Sunyer FX. Medical hazards of obesity. Ann Intern Med 1993; 119 (7 Pt 2) 655-660
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Bishop EH. Pelvic scoring for elective induction. Obstet Gynecol 1964; 24: 266-268
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Johnson DP, Davis NR, Brown AJ. Risk of cesarean delivery after induction at term in nulliparous women with an unfavorable cervix. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003; 188: 1565-1569 ; discussion 1569–1572
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Xenakis EMJ, Piper JM, Conway DL, Langer O. Induction of labor in the nineties: conquering the unfavorable cervix. Obstet Gynecol 1997; 90: 235-239
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Hendrix NW, Chauhan SP, Morrison JC, Magann EF, Martin Jr JN, Devoe LD. Bishop score: a poor diagnostic test to predict failed induction versus vaginal delivery. South Med J 1998; 91: 248-252
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Cnattingius R, Höglund B, Kieler H. Emergency cesarean delivery in induction of labor: an evaluation of risk factors. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2005; 84: 456-462
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology Committee on Practice Bulletins-Obstetrics. ACOG Practice Bulletin Number 49, December 2003: Dystocia and augmentation of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2003; 102: 1445-1454
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Witter FR, Caulfield LE, Stoltzfus RJ. Influence of maternal anthropometric status and birth weight on the risk of cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 1995; 85: 947-951
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Hibbard JU, Gilbert S, Landon MB , et al; National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. Trial of labor or repeat cesarean delivery in women with morbid obesity and previous cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 108: 125-133
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Durnwald CP, Ehrenberg HM, Mercer BM. The impact of maternal obesity and weight gain on vaginal birth after cesarean section success. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 191: 954-957
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Hilliard AM, Chauhan SP, Zhao Y, Rankins NC. Effect of obesity on length of labor in nulliparous women. Am J Perinatol 2012; 29: 127-132
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Vahratian A, Zhang J, Troendle JF, Savitz DA, Siega-Riz AM. Maternal prepregnancy overweight and obesity and the pattern of labor progression in term nulliparous women. Obstet Gynecol 2004; 104 (5 Pt 1) 943-951
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Rouse DJ, Weiner SJ, Bloom SL , et al; Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network (MFMU). Failed labor induction: toward an objective diagnosis. Obstet Gynecol 2011; 117 (2 Pt 1) 267-272
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 Zhang J, Troendle JF, Yancey MK. Reassuring the labor curve in nulliparous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 187: 824-828
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Rouse DJ, Owen J, Hauth JC. Active-phase labor arrest: oxytocin augmentation for at least 4 hours. Obstet Gynecol 1999; 93: 323-328
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar