Uterine Contraction Pattern as a Predictor of the Mode of Delivery

“…Despite these findings in some studies no association was found between maternal age and failure to progress ( Chen et al, 2004 ; Khunpradit et al,2005 ). In this study, in accordance of some studies there was a relationship between fetal weight and failure to progress ( Althaus et al, 2006 ; Oppenheimer et al,2002 ). It’s speculated fetal head circumference increases with fetal weight gain and then cephalo-pelvic disproportion increases, particularly in cases where the mother’s pelvis is relatively narrow ( Chen et al,2004 ).…”

“…The authors reported wide variation in contraction pattern both within and between groups which limited their conclusions. 14 In a study evaluating spatial patterns of the electrical activity of contractions, Euliano et al 10 also measured contraction frequency with uterine EMG and reported that in women of mixed parity (N = 36), all had sustained contraction frequency of 1-3 minutes, even though 12 gave birth by cesarean for labor arrest, suggesting that frequency alone was not associated with cesarean in this small study. Ebrahimzadeh Zagami et al 17 reported decreased mean number of contractions measured by tocodynamometry in a 30-minute period during active labor, defined as 3 to 5 cm cervical dilation, in women who experienced cesarean birth (n = 162; mean number of contractions 7.05 ± 1.46) compared with women who gave birth vaginally (n = 38; mean number of contractions 8.3 ± 2.30; P = .002).…”

“…A similar between‐group pattern was noted when the pre‐ and postaugmentation slopes of the SD of interpeak time were compared (preaugmentation SD slopes: normal labor, 0.8 s/cm; labor dystocia and vaginal birth, 0.4 s/cm; cesarean birth, −1.0 s/cm; postaugmentation SD slopes: labor dystocia and vaginal birth, −6.4 s/cm; cesarean birth, −0.4 s/cm). The authors reported wide variation in contraction pattern both within and between groups which limited their conclusions 14 …”

“…The experimental part of this study provides data about the timing, duration, and spacing of pain during the first stage of labour, and about its regularity or rather irregularity. A study of a large cardiotocography database has found similar values for the intervals in between contractions, 15 obviously without giving information about pain duration and, more Table 1 SDs (in min) of the differences between observed and predicted inter-contraction intervals for all patients with long (.100 min) time series and the different forecast models: naïve, moving average (mean) of the last 2, 3, and 4 intervals, ETS, and autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA). P-values are given for Bartlett's test to check for equal variances between different models (null hypothesis-no differences between the variances for all models) importantly, about the irregularity of individual time series of contractions.…”