Open Document File - Utah Government Publications Online

2007 UTAH’S HEALTH: AN ANNUAL REVIEW
Table 7: Time of Delivery
Time of Day Induced* Non-Induced
% %
8 am - 12 pm 20.5 23.8
12 pm - 4 pm 36.4 19.0
4 pm - 8 pm 23.7 16.8
8 pm - 12 am 9.3 11.1
12 am - 4 am 7.0 17.1
4 am - 8 am 3.2 12.2
*Induced labor in the absence of an identified indication.
Figure 3: Delivery by Day of the Week
Percent of Live Births
25
20
15
10
5
0
12.8
5.0
Discussion
Non-Induced Labor
Induced Labor
15.8
14.6 14.5
19.8
15.1
17.1
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday
Day of the Week
Thursday Friday Saturday
Induction rates are increasing rapidly both locally and nationally. Increases were seen among women with
documented medical indications as well as among women with elective inductions (Yeast et al., 1999).
Explanation of the dramatic increase in the incidence of labor induction is certainly complex and may be
comprised of numerous contributing factors (Rayburn et al., 2002; Zhang et al., 2002). A suggested primary
reason for the rising usage of induction centers on the ability it provides to plan the timing of birth for the
physician, patient, and family. Other explanations include the increasing availability of effective cervical ripeners
and medical liability concerns associated with continued expectant management, particularly post-term (Rayburn
et al., 2002). In addition, the ability to more accurately determine the gestational age of the neonate, and more
sophisticated techniques of antepartum fetal surveillance may also contribute to the rising induction rate (Yeast et
al., 1999).
In assessing maternal outcomes using 2005 birth certificate data, this study found that the cesarean delivery rate
was lower among the induced group compared to the non-induced group. This finding is consistent with the
30 Labor Induction Trends © 2007 The University of Utah: All Rights Reserved
15.3
19.8
14.3
16.0
13.4
6.6