Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T17:45:26.543Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 1 - Normal Labor

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 September 2017

By
Etoi A. Garrison
Edited by
Martin Olsen
Martin Olsen
Affiliation:
East Tennessee State University
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
Obstetric Care , pp. 1 - 12
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2017

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ravanos, K, Dagklis, T, Petousis, S, Margioula-Siarkou, C, Prapas, Y, Prapas, N. Factors implicated in the initiation of human parturition in term and preterm labor: a review. Gynecol Endocrinol 2015;31(9):679–83.Google Scholar
Norwitz, ER, Robinson, JN, Challis, JR. The control of labor. N Engl J Med 1999;341:660–6.Google Scholar
Challis, JRG, Matthews, SG, Gibb, W, Lye, SJ. Endocrine and paracrine regulation of birth at term and preterm. Endocr Rev 2000;21:514–50.Google Scholar
Hamilton, BE, Martin, JA, Osterman, MJ, Curtin, SC, Matthews, TJ. Births: Final Data for 2014. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2015 Dec;64(12):1–64.Google Scholar
Kozhimannil, KB, Law, MR, Virnig, BA. Cesarean delivery rates vary tenfold among US hospitals: Reducing variation may address quality and cost issues. Health Aff (Millwood) 2013;32:527–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Obstetric care consensus no. 1: safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2014;123(3):693–711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lockwood, C. The initiation of parturition at term. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 2004;31(4):935.Google Scholar
Liao, J, Buhimschi, C, Norwitz, E. Normal labor: mechanism and duration. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 2005;32:145.Google Scholar
Beshay, V, Carr, B, Rainey, W. The human fetal adrenal gland, corticotropin releasing hormone, and parturition. Semin Reprod Med 2007;25(1):14.Google Scholar
Oh, S, Kim, C, Park, I, et al. Progesterone receptor isoform (A/B) ratio of human fetal membranes increases during term parturition. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005;193:1156.Google Scholar
Messano, S. Myometrial progesterone responsiveness. Semin Reprod Med 2007;25:5–13.Google Scholar
Fuchs, A, Fuchs, F, Husslein, P, Soloff, M. Oxytocin receptors in the human uterus during pregnancy and parturition. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1984;150:734.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fuchs, A, Husslein, P, Fuchs, F. Oxytocin and the initiation of human parturition. II. Stimulation of prostaglandin production in human decidua by oxytocin. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1981;141:694.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Blanks, AM, Thornton, S. The role of oxytocin in parturition. Br J Obstet Gynecol 2003;110(suppl 20):46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zeeman, G, Khan-Dawood, F, Dawood, M. Oxytocin and its receptor in pregnancy and parturition: Current concepts and clinical implications. Obstet Gynecol 1997;89:873.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dawood, M, Wang, C, Gupta, R, et al. Fetal contribution to oxytocin in human labor. Obstet Gynecol 1978;52:205.Google Scholar
Garrison, EA, Kilpatrick, SJ. Normal Labor. In: Gabbe, SG, Niebyl, JR, Simpson, JL, Landon, MB, Galan, HL, Jauniaux, ERM, Driscoll, DA, eds. Obstetrics: Normal and Problem Pregnancies. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier, 6th ed.;2012.Google Scholar
Bakker, JJ, Verhoeven, CJ, Janssen, PF, et al. Outcomes after internal versus external tocodynamometry for monitoring labor. N Engl J Med 2010;362:306–13.Google Scholar
Harper, LM, Shanks, AL, Tuuli, MG, Roehl, KA, Cahill, AG. The Risks and Benefits of Internal Monitors in Laboring Patients. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209(1):38.e1–38.Google Scholar
Macones, G, Hankins, G, Spong, C, et al. The 2008 National Institute of Child Health and Human Development workshop report on electronic fetal monitoring: update on definitions, interpretation, and research guidelines. Obstet Gynecol 2008;112:661.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Induction of labor. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 107. Obstet Gynecol 2009;114:386–97.Google Scholar
Caldeyro-Barcia, R, Sica-Blanco, Y, Poseiro, J, et al. A quantitative study of the action of synthetic oxytocin on the pregnant human uterus. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1957;121:18.Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstetric care consensus no. 1: Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecology 2014;123(3):693–711.Google Scholar
Rossi, A, Mullin, P, Prefumo, F. Prevention, management, and outcomes of macrosomia: A systematic review of literature and meta-analysis. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2013;68(10):702.Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Fetal Macrosomia. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists;2000.Google Scholar
Chauhan, SP, Sullivan, CA, Lutton, TC, Magann, EF, Morrison, JC. Parous patients’ estimate of birth weight in postterm pregnancy. J Perinatol 1995. May–Jun;15(3):192–4.Google Scholar
Caldwell, W, Moloy, H. Anatomical variations in the female pelvis and their effect in labor, with a suggested classification. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1933; 26:479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitley, N. ed. A Manual of Clinical Obstetrics. Baltimore: Lippincott;1985:162–7.Google Scholar
Maharaj, D. Assessing cephalopelvic disproportion: back to the basics. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2010; 65(6):387.Google Scholar
Zaretsky, M, Alexander, J, McIntire, D, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging pelvimetry and the prediction of labor dystocia. Obstet Gynecol 2005;106(5 Pt 1):919.Google Scholar
Friedman, E. Primigravid labor. Obstet Gynecol 1955;6:567.Google Scholar
Friedman, E. Labor in multiparas; a graphicostatistical analysis. Obstet Gynecol 1956;8:691.Google Scholar
Peisner, DB, Rosen, MG. Transition from latent to active labor. Obstet Gynecol 1986;68:441.Google Scholar
Zhang, J, Troendle, J, Mikolajczyk, R, et al. The natural history of the normal first stage of labor. Obstet Gynecol 2010;115:705.Google Scholar
Zhang, J, Landy, H, Branch, D, et al. Consortium on Safe Labor. Contemporary patterns of spontaneous labor with normal neonatal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol 2010;116:1281.Google Scholar
Obstetrics Care Consensus No. 1. Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2014;123(3):693.Google Scholar
Committee on Obstetric Practice, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. (ACOG) Committee Opinion No. 379: Management of delivery of a newborn with meconium-stained amniotic fluid. Obstet Gynecol 2007;110(3):739.Google Scholar
Hutton, E, Hassan, E. Late vs early clamping of the umbilical cord in full term neonates: Systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials. JAMA 2007;297:1241.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McDonald, S, Middleton, P, Dowswell, T, et al. Effect of timing of umbilical cord clamping of term infants on maternal and neonatal outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;(7):CD004074.Google Scholar
Rabe, H, Diaz-Rossello, J, Duley, L, et al. Effect of timing of umbilical cord clamping and other strategies to influence placental transfusion at preterm birth on maternal and infant outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;(8):Art. No.: CD003248.Google Scholar
Committee on Obstetric Practice. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion No. 543: Timing of umbilical cord clamping after birth. Obstet Gynecol 2012;120:1522.Google Scholar
Moore, ER, Anderson, GC, Bergman, N, Dowswell, T. Early skin-to-skin contact for mothers and their healthy newborn infants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;(5):CD003519.Google Scholar
Rogers, J, Wood, J, McCandlish, R, et al. Active versus expectant management of third stage of labour: The Hinchingbrooke randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 1998;351:693.Google Scholar
Begley, M, Gyte, G, Devane, D, McGuire, W, Weeks, A. Active versus expectant management for women in the third stage of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;(11):CD007412.Google Scholar
Main, EK, Goffman, D, Scavone, BM, Low, LK, Bingham, D, Fontaine, PL, Gorlin, JB, Lagrew, DC, Levy, BS. National Partnership for Maternal Safety: Consensus Bundle on Obstetric Hemorrhage. Obstet Gynecol 2015 July:126(1);155–62.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×