Outcomes of Expectant Management of Term Prelabor Rupture of Membranes

• Published in: Journal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing Vol. 50; no. 2; pp. 122 - 132
• Main Authors: Hagen, Irene D., Bailey, Joanne M., Zielinski, Ruth E.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01.03.2021
• Subjects: Cesarean Section; chorioamnionitis; endometritis; expectant management; Female; Fetal Membranes, Premature Rupture - therapy; Humans; induction; Infant, Newborn; Labor, Induced; Pregnancy; Retrospective Studies; term prelabor rupture of membranes; Watchful Waiting; expectant management; endometritis; induction; chorioamnionitis; term prelabor rupture of membranes
• ISSN: 0884-2175; 1552-6909
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jogn.2020.10.010

To assess rates of induction/augmentation of labor, maternal infection, neonatal outcomes, and time to birth when women were expectantly managed after term prelabor rupture of membranes (PROM) at home or in the hospital. Retrospective, descriptive study based on a review of data from a hospital midwifery service database and chart review. A large Midwest hospital with 4,700 births annually. We used the cases of women who received midwifery care, experienced term PROM, and had singleton fetuses in the vertex position. We conducted an analysis of maternal and neonatal outcomes with term PROM using data from a midwifery service quality improvement database. We compared characteristics and outcomes between management plans (immediate induction, expectant hospital, and expectant home) using chi-square, analysis of variance, and independent t-tests. PROM occurred in 281 (12%) of the 2,357 women cared for by the midwifery service between January 2016 and December 2018. One hundred fifty women (53.3%) opted to wait for labor onset at home, 102 (36.3%) were expectantly managed in the hospital, 21 (7.5%) were admitted for immediate induction of labor, and 8 (2.8%) were admitted for immediate cesarean birth. The rate of spontaneous labor onset was not significantly different between the two expectant management groups or between nulliparous and multiparous women. A total of 88 (34.9%) women who were expectantly managed ultimately had their labors induced. Rates of chorioamnionitis and endometritis were not significantly different between the expectant management groups in this study or compared with national averages. There was no difference in NICU admissions or Apgar scores below 7. The mean time from PROM to birth was significantly shorter in the expectant management in hospital group (27.3 hours) than in the expectant management at home group (33.5 hours). Expectant management at home or in the hospital is appropriate for low-risk pregnant women with term PROM. Women for whom this option is appropriate include those with term singleton fetuses in vertex presentation with reassuring fetal heart rates and confirmed clear amniotic fluid. Acceptable time frames for home management include up to 24 hours for women with negative group B streptococcus cultures and up to 12 hours for those with positive cultures. Expectant management at home or in the hospital may be a safe option for low-risk women experiencing term prelabor rupture of membranes without complications.