I hope I’m in labor for as long as possible — said no woman ever.
If you’ve birthed another human before, you know that labor can be a marathon of pain. Yes, we get the greatest gift possible at the end, but that doesn’t mean we wouldn’t enjoy a shorter, less painful race to the finish line. But a recent study published in Obstetrics & Gynecology claims we’ll be able to do just that — at least, if we wind up getting induced.
The study introduces a “combination method” of two different types of induction interventions. The results? A shorter labor by an average of four hours. Um, what? Four fewer hours of writhing pain, screaming profanities, and breaking my husband’s knuckles? Yes please.
With induction as common as it is, the interest in newer, more efficient methods of getting a baby out makes sense. According to the CDC, the rate of labor induction in the U.S. has been as high as 23% in recent years, though it has been on the decline. Many of the common induction methods include a pill, vaginal insert, or gel, or by using a balloon catheter that releases hormones. Both of these methods can take hours to take effect, causing labor to last for … well, eternity.
So Dr. Lisa D. Levine of the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania conducted a study of 500 women, in which she combined both methods. She found that by inducing labor with both a Foley catheter and a prostaglandin drug called misoprostol, labor was shortened by approximately four hours.
Inductions are used for a variety of medical conditions such as preeclampsia, gestational diabetes, or other health risks to the mom or baby. Other mothers (like me), opt for inductions when they’re a week or more overdue with a 9+ lbs. baby and just want to see their feet again. After being induced, my first labor took nothing short of 24 hours. Yep; 24 hours of walking the hospital halls, getting into the tub, getting out of the tub, sitting on the yoga ball, swearing at my husband, lying on one side, lying on the other side … and repeat. The induction process was sloooooow going, and had I been given a chance to speed it up, I probably would have considered it.
However, obviously this method is not for everyone. Many women forego inductions altogether (unless medically necessary), as they have been linked to a higher rate of c-sections and can cause other complications. Also, some moms want drug-free labors and deliveries, making the use of this combo method a definite no for them.
Plus, the method itself is new and has only been tested at one institution, so it’s natural that skeptics are suggesting further studies before it is used in more hospitals. For now though, Dr. Levine is offering it to women at her hospital who are interested (and she even tried it herself — with success). Not only does she stand by her method and its success rate of reducing painful hours of labor, but she also notes that “it has benefits to the health-care system in general because the faster women deliver, the quicker they can get out of the hospital.”
The bottom line is, every woman has the right to choose the labor method that’s best for her and baby, based on her personal circumstances. Maybe you are going to give birth in a pool with no drug interventions. Or maybe you’ve already scheduled your induction. For women whose labors are induced by Dr. Levine, they may get four extra hours of pain-free baby bonding time. And frankly, that sounds glorious.