Journal of Clinical Gynecology and Obstetrics, ISSN 1927-1271 print, 1927-128X online, Open Access
Article copyright, the authors; Journal compilation copyright, J Clin Gynecol Obstet and Elmer Press Inc
Journal website http://www.jcgo.org

Original Article

Volume 3, Number 1, February 2014, pages 30-34


The Efficacy of Membrane Sweeping at Term and Effect on the Duration of Pregnancy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Figure

Figure 1.
Figure 1. Flow diagram.

Tables

Table 1. Maternal Characteristics
 
VariableMembrane sweeping (n = 80)Control (n = 80)P-Value
Data are presented as mean ± SD or percentage; *median.
Age (years)28.23 ± 5.3228.2 ± 6.80.979
Primigravida22 (27.5%)24 (30%)0.431
*Gravidity (2 - 4)330.959
*Parity (0 - 3)110.689
Gestational age38.4 ± 0.938.0 ± 1.20.844
Body mass index (kg/m2)30.65 ± 5.229.28 ± 4.70.649

 

Table 2. Obstetric Complications
 
VariableMembrane sweeping (n = 80)Control (n = 80)P-Value
CS: cesarean section; PROM: prelabor rupture of membranes.
Prior 1 CS7 (8.8%)6 (7.5%)0.500
PROM4 (5%)2 (2.5%)0.341
Post date at 41(week)8 (10%)20 (25%)0.01
Meconium4 (5.0%)20 (25%)< 0.0001

 

Table 3. Maternal and Fetal Outcomes
 
VariableMembrane sweeping (n = 80)Control (n = 80)P-Value
SVD: spontaneous vaginal delivery; CS: cesarean section; NICU: neonatal intensive care unit; PPH: postpartum hemorrhage.
Gestational age At delivery (weeks)39.5 ± 0.940.0 ± 1.20.004
Induction: (at 41weeks)8 (10%)20 (25%)0.01
Spontaneous labor (< 41 weeks)72 (90%)60 (75%)0.01
Duration of labor4.7 ± 2.05.7 ± 3.10.03
Mode of delivery:
  SVD70 (87.5%)67 (83.8%)0.326
  Vacuum-6 (7.5%)0.028
  CS10 (12.5%)7 (8.8%)0.445
  Fetal distress7 (8.8%)9 (11.3%)0.397
Birth weight (kg)3.1 ± 0.33.3 ± 0.50.01
Macrosomia (≥ 4 kg)7 (8.8%)20 (25%)0.01
Apgar score
  1 min8.79 ± 1.08.55 ± 1.00.658
  5 min9.93 ± 0.579.76 ± 0.530.187
Apgar score < 71 (1.3%)3 (3.8%)0.314
NICU admission1 (1.3%)4 (5%)0.184
PPH1 (1.3%)1 (1.3%)0.752
Hospital stays1.60 ± 0.621.50 ± 0.820.267