Journal of South Asian Federation of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Register      Login

VOLUME 13 , ISSUE 4 ( July-August, 2021 ) > List of Articles


Repeated Sweeping of Membranes at Term Pregnancy as Method of Induction

Sonu K Batham, Shaheen Anjum

Keywords : Induction of labor, Membrane sweeping, Postterm pregnancy, Spontaneous labor, Term pregnancy

Citation Information : Batham SK, Anjum S. Repeated Sweeping of Membranes at Term Pregnancy as Method of Induction. J South Asian Feder Obs Gynae 2021; 13 (4):265-268.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10006-1938

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 20-11-2021

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Background: This study was aimed to determine the effectiveness of serial membranes sweeping in term pregnancy, and its effect on labor. Materials and methods: In this prospective study, 123 women with an uncomplicated pregnancy at 39 weeks or more gestation were recruited for the study; out of them, 38 were cases (serial sweeping group) and 85 were in the control (no sweeping group). The primary outcome measure was the occurrence of spontaneous labor and changes in Bishop\'s score after each sweeping. Other outcome measures included were interval of, occurrence of premature rupture of membranes, the total duration of active labor, mode of delivery, rate of cesarean section and its causes, and neonatal and maternal outcome. Results: There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups regarding maternal age, parity, and Bishop\'s score at recruitment. The onset of labor was not significantly different in both groups {(6.82 ± 1.967 days) (7.96 ± 3.63 days)} from the day of recruitment. A total of 27 (75.0%) patients of the cases group delivered in the second week whereas there were 40 (47.05%) patients of the control group. This showed a significant difference (p <0.05), and five (13.2%) patients went into postterm pregnancy, in comparison with 22 (25.88%) patients in the control group. There was no significant difference regarding the mode of delivery and maternal and fetal outcomes in cases and controls. Conclusion: Frequent membrane sweeping is not having any significant effect in the mode of induction of labor.

PDF Share
  1. Tenore JL. Methods for cervical ripening and induction of labor. Am Fam Physician 2003;67(10):2123–2128. PMID: 12776961.
  2. Adair CD. Nonpharmacologic approaches to cervical priming and labor induction. Clin Obstet Gynecol 2000;43(3):447–454. DOI: 10.1097/00003081-200009000-00005.
  3. Chawla S, Singh SK, Saraswat M, et al. Induction of labor: our experience. J Mar Med Soc 2017;19(2):96–98. DOI: 10.4103/jmms.jmms_51_17.
  4. ACOG Committee Opinion No 579: definition of term pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2013;122(5):1139–1140. DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000437385.88715.4a. PMID: 24150030.
  5. Galal M, Symonds I, Murray H, et al. Postterm pregnancy. Facts Views Vis Obgyn 2012;4(3):175–187. PMID: 24753906; PMCID: PMC3991404.
  6. Bruckner TA, Cheng YW, Caughey AB. Increased neonatal mortality among normal-weight births beyond 41 weeks of gestation in California. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008;199(4):421.e1–421.e7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2008.05.015. PMID: 18639211.
  7. Boulvain M, Stan C, Irion O. Membrane sweeping for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2005;2005(1):CD000451. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000451.pub2 [Update in: Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020;2:CD000451. PMID: 15674873; PMCID: PMC7032890].
  8. Boulvain M, Irion O. Stripping/sweeping the membranes for inducing labour or preventing post-term pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000;(2):CD000451. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000451 [Update in: Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001;(2):CD000451. PMID: 10796204].
  9. WHO Reproductive Health Library. WHO recommendation on sweeping of membranes for reducing formal induction of labour. Geneva: World Health Organization, The WHO Reproductive Health Library; 2011.
  10. Allott HA, Palmer CR. Sweeping the membranes: a valid procedure in stimulating the onset of labour? Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1993;100(10): 898–903. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1993.tb15103.x. PMID: 8217970.
  11. Jeewantha RD, Jayathilake WMBG, Talagala IA, et al. The effectiveness of twice versus once-only membrane sweeping among uncomplicated primi gravidae at 40 weeks of gestation–a randomized controlled trial. Sri Lanka J Obstet Gynaecol 2018;40(4):78–84. DOI: 10.4038/sljog.v40i4.7869.
  12. Finucane EM, Murphy DJ, Biesty LM, et al. Membrane sweeping for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020;2(2):CD000451. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000451.pub3. PMID: 32103497; PMCID: PMC7044809.
  13. Zamzami T, Al Senani N. The efficacy of membrane sweeping at term and effect on the duration of pregnancy: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Gynecol Obstet N Am 2014;3(1):30–34. DOI: 10.14740/jcgo225w.
  14. Putnam K, Magann EF, Doherty DA, et al. Randomized clinical trial evaluating the frequency of membrane sweeping with an unfavorable cervix at 39 weeks. Int J Women's Health 2011;3:287–294. DOI: 10.2147/IJWH.S23436.
  15. Saichandran S, Arun A, Samal S, et al. Efficacy and safety of serial membrane sweeping to prevent post term pregnancy: a randomised study. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol 2017;4(6):1882–1886. DOI: 10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20151279. ISSN 2320-1789.
  16. Hamdan M, Sidhu K, Sabir N, et al. Serial membrane sweeping at term in planned vaginal birth after cesarean: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2009;114(4):745–751. DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181b8fa00. PMID: 19888030.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.