Induction of Labour

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Induction of labour (IOL) continues to attract our attention, and all for very good reason. The last year has reignited debate surrounding the procedure and has again made us think critically about when and how we should artificially initiate labour. A number of landscape changing studies were published in 2019 – the SWEPIS study; a systematic analysis of IOL clinical guidelines; a qualitative systematic review and thematic synthesis of women’s experiences of IOL and an examination of the care and decision-making of women and clinicians surrounding IOL. These studies have us asking the big questions about IOL once more. It is clear that the growing evidence base hasn’t really lessened the polarised views. If anything, the latest research, at least in my mind, has made it much more difficult to see the wood for the trees. In this article, I try to make some sense of the results of these studies and what they mean for our practice. I explore some of the key questions I have about IOL and how we as midwives, can continue to advocate for a woman-centred approach.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)40-49
Number of pages10
JournalAustralian Midwifery News
Volume20
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2020

Keywords

  • Induction of Labour
  • Pregnancy
  • Birthing

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Induction of Labour'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this