Women who had membrane sweeping were a bit more likely to end up in spontaneous labour (and more on the use of this term below) than women who did not have membrane sweeping. LetвЂ™s look a bit more closely at the numbers from this updated review. ThatвЂ™s hard to measure, and most of the studies arenвЂ™t large enough to be able to assess that. And those might possibly be the women who were just about to go into labour anyway. Previous research on this topic has suggested that membrane sweeping may be effective, but only in some women. Overall, the certainty of the evidence was found to be low.вЂќ ( Finucane et al 2020). There were also some issues with possible bias: вЂњOf the seven studies that reported financial funding, two studies reported funding from pharmaceutical companies. вЂњStudies compared membrane sweeping with no intervention or sham intervention, and also compared membrane sweeping with vaginal or intracervical prostaglandins, oral misoprostol, oxytocin and repeated membrane sweeping.вЂќ The design of the studies varied, though. These looked at the outcomes for 6940 women from a wide range of countries including high-, middle- and low-income countries. This edition includes 44 randomised studies. The review itself was updated as more studies have been published since the last edition. Looks at the evidence relating to due dates, вЂpost-termвЂ™, older and larger women, suspected big babies, maternal race and more. In Your Own Time was written to help parents and professionals better understand the issues and the evidence relating to the current induction epidemic. Loads more on the evidence for induction in In Your Own Time: how western medicine controls the start of labour and why this needs to stop.

And although many people agree that it is preferable to full-blown medical induction, there is an argument that we should be offering induction of labour only when the benefits truly outweigh the disadvantages. It can imply that womenвЂ™s bodies are inadequate. Some people feel that it is a good example of вЂtoo much intervention too soonвЂ™. The pros and cons are often not discussed at length. In some areas it is now offered routinely.

This would be advantageous, as medical induction carries risks and is usually carried out in hospital.Д«ut membrane sweeping is also controversial. Their hope is that it will prevent the need for labour to be induced with drugs and other interventions. It is cheap and easy to perform and it can be done at home or in a clinic rather than in a hospital. There are good reasons that some clinicians and systems of care promote the вЂstretch and sweepвЂ™ intervention. This procedure, also known as a stretch and sweep, is offered to women in some parts of the world as the first step in the process of inducing labour. The Cochrane collaboration have updated their review on membrane sweeping for induction of labour ( Finucane et al 2020).

Membeane sweep