Elective induction versus spontaneous labour in Latin America
Gláucia Virgínia Guerra, José Guilherme Cecatti, João Paulo Souza, Aníbal Faúndes, Sirlei Siani Morais, Ahmet Metin Gülmezoglu, Renato Passini, Mary Angela Parpinelli, Guillermo Carroli, for the WHO Global Survey on Maternal & Perinatal Health in Latin America Study Group
Volume 89, Number 9, September 2011, 657-665
Table 1. Elective inductions of labour culminating in vaginal or Caesarean delivery, by method of induction, in women with low-risk pregnancies in selected Latin American countries, 2005
| Induction method | Total | Vaginal |
Caesarean |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. | % | No. | % | |||
| Oxytocina | 1219 | 1093 | 89.7 | 126 | 10.3 | |
| Combinedb | 409 | 362 | 88.5 | 47 | 11.5 | |
| Misoprostol | 165 | 128 | 77.6 | 36 | 21.8 | |
| Other prostaglandin | 33 | 27 | 81.8 | 6 | 18.2 | |
| Artificial ROM | 19 | 18 | 94.7 | 1 | 5.3 | |
| Membrane sweeping | 2 | 1 | 50.0 | 1 | 50.0 | |
| Total | 1847 | 1629 | 88.2 | 217 | 11.7 | |
ROM, rupture of membranes.
a One case with no information on mode of delivery.
b Of these cases, 329 correspond to oxytocin plus another method.