Women's perceptions of induction of labour outcomes: Results of an online-survey in Germany

C. Schwarz, M. M. Gross, P. Heusser, B. Berger


OBJECTIVE: induction of labour (IOL) is a common procedure in high income countries. It may be conducted for medical as well as non-medical reasons. Women's views on induction of labour have not extensively been evaluated as yet. Also, women's preferences for certain methods of induction including alternative and complementary methods need further exploration in order to meet their expectations and needs. DESIGN AND SETTING: we published a short online questionnaire on women'views and experiences with IOL. MEASUREMENTS AND FINDINGS: we asked for indication and gestational age at induction; method of induction, duration of labour and mode of birth. We also asked for the extent of desired, and experienced support and participation in decision-making. Within four weeks of being online, 698 women answered the questionnaire. Most frequent reasons for induction were postmaturity (51.7%), doctor's recommendation (31.6%) and medical complications (25.6%). Most women were induced with misoprostol or dinoprostone, but nearly half of the respondents were also offered, or asked for, complementary and alternative methods (CAM). 50% or more women would have preferred more information on alternatives to IOL, methods of IOL, side effects of the drugs, information on alternatives (59.2%) and on the medication (55.3%). Many would have wished for more support (49.9%) with decision-making (55.2%), and more time (54.1%). KEY CONCLUSION: women' expectations and needs regarding IOL are widely unmet in current clinical practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: there is a need for evidence-based information and decisional support for pregnant women who need to decide how to proceed once term is reached.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)3-10
Number of pages8
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Research Areas and Centers

  • Health Sciences

DFG Research Classification Scheme

  • 205-21 Gynaecology and Obstetrics
  • 205-02 Public Health, Health Services Research and Social Medicine

Cite this