ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT04041687Updated Oct 30, 2024

Outpatient Cervical Ripening

An observational study in Pregnancy, sponsored by Prisma Health-Upstate. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to female participants. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-10-30.

Sponsored by Prisma Health-Upstate · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
35
Sex
Female
01

Study summary

The process of labor induction can mean several hours or even days spent as an inpatient prior to delivery. These prolonged hospital admissions contribute to increased financial burden on both patients and hospital systems, dissatisfaction with induction length, and staffing concerns. Several obstetric practices in the U.S. have already incorporated outpatient cervical ripening (the beginning of the induction process) into their regular practices. The investigators aim to determine if outpatient cervical ripening is a safe, non-inferior, and preferred option to the traditional inpatient induction process.

Read the detailed description

This study will attempt to assess whether outpatient cervical ripening with misoprostol, a synthetic PGE1 analog (Cytotec(R), Pfizer), is an effective and safe option for low-risk pregnant women at or after 39 weeks gestation with an unfavorable cervix. This study comes in the wake of the ARRIVE trial, which may reasonably increase the number of low-risk term inductions.

The process of labor induction, including cervical ripening, can take several hours or even days. This prolonged course contributes not only to long hospital stays and subsequently increased financial burden to both patients and healthcare systems, but also to patient and provider dissatisfaction with length of induction. Additionally, with the expected increase in elective inductions of primigravid women with unfavorable cervices as a result of the ARRIVE study, hospitals face the possibility of being at capacity on labor and delivery with inadequate staffing to ensure patient safety.

Traditionally, the process of cervical ripening begins after inpatient hospital admission. Several small studies have evaluated outpatient ripening with various agents including foley balloon catheters, PGE1 analogs such as misoprostol, and other prostaglandins. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has commented on the limited data available on outpatient cervical ripening safety and efficacy, noting that outpatient cervical ripening is "appropriate for carefully selected patients" in Practice Bulletin 107. Data have been reassuring as far as safety and efficacy based on several studies, but are limited due to small sample size, For example, a randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled study in 2009 found that outpatient oral misoprostol for late term pregnancies had a significantly shorter time from study entry to spontaneous labor and delivery. This study showed no difference in fetal or maternal morbidity, but was not powered to safety as there were only 44 subjects per group (10). Some institutions including OB/GYN groups at Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital, South Shore Hospital in MA, and Alaska Native medical center have incorporated outpatient ripening into their everyday practices, but little data on outcomes have been published from these sites.

The investigators aim to determine if outpatient cervical ripening is a safe, non-inferior option to the traditional inpatient cervical ripening. The investigators will evaluate whether outpatient ripening impacts patient satisfaction, patient/hospital costs, and adverse outcomes in our health system setting. Cervical ripening is standard care at other OB/GYN practices across the county and the investigators intend to apply this care pathway for patients. The investigator's goal is to ensure the safety of participants by carefully selecting low risk patients and providing necessary fetal monitoring before and after administration. The results of this study can be used to determine if outpatient cervical ripening can be incorporated in daily practices of OB/GYN providers at GHS.

02

Conditions studied

  • Pregnancy

Keywords

  • induction
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Prisma Health-Upstate is the lead sponsor of 76 studies on the registry; 7 are open to participants now.

Of its 12 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 10 (83%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Child (0–17), Adult (18–64), Older adult (65+)
Sexes eligible
Female
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Probability sample

Study population

Low risk pregnant womenn

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Low risk, pregnant women seeking elective induction of labor after 39 weeks gestation
  • Women without a medical indication for induction of labor.
  • Multigravida or primigravida women who are scheduled for late term (postdates) induction will be included.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Previous cesarean section,
  • Any contraindication to labor or vaginal delivery,
  • A ny patients where misoprostol should be used with caution (IUGR, oligohydramnios)
  • Bishop score > 6
  • ruptured amnioticmembranes
05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
35 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No
06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Assess outpatient cervical ripening protocol feasibility

    length of induction misoprostol, a synthetic PGE1 analog (Cytotec®, Pfizer, New York), is an effective and safe option for low-risk pregnant women with an unfavorable cervix at or after 39 weeks gestation.

    Time frame: one year

  2. Assess outpatient cervical ripening protocol feasibility

    unplanned/unanticipated admissions

    Time frame: one year

  3. Assess outpatient cervical ripening protocol feasibility

    Rate of change in Bishop score

    Time frame: one year

  4. Assess outpatient cervical ripening protocol feasibility

    number of misoprostol doses required

    Time frame: one year

  5. Assess outpatient cervical ripening protocol feasibility

    number of cervical checks performed

    Time frame: one year

  6. Assess outpatient cervical ripening protocol feasibility

    rates of chorioamnionitis or endometritis

    Time frame: one year

  7. Assess outpatient cervical ripening protocol feasibility

    fetal or neonatal complications

    Time frame: one year

  8. Assess outpatient cervical ripening protocol feasibility

    other maternal complications of induction or delivery

    Time frame: one year

  9. Assess outpatient cervical ripening protocol feasibility

    apgar scores

    Time frame: one year

  10. Assess outpatient cervical ripening protocol feasibility

    route of delivery - vaginal delivery with or without assistance, cesarean section and indication

    Time frame: one year

  11. Assess outpatient cervical ripening protocol feasibility

    satisfaction - patient and provider, via survey (labor agentry questionnaire) for outpatient group

    Time frame: one year

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Prisma Health
    Greenville, South Carolina 29605, United States
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Ran from Jun 2019 to primary completion in Mar 2020, 9 months.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Jul 26, 2019
First posted
Aug 1, 2019
StartActual
Jun 1, 2019
Primary completionActual
Mar 1, 2020
CompletionActual
Mar 1, 2020
Last update
Oct 30, 2024
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Oct 30, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04041687
Lead sponsor
Prisma Health-Upstate
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Aug 1, 2019
Start date
Jun 1, 2019
Primary completion
Mar 1, 2020
Completion
Mar 1, 2020
Last update
Oct 30, 2024

Study contacts

Lauren Demosthenes, MD
principal investigator · Prisma Health

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Oct 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion