{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,21]],"date-time":"2026-04-21T03:44:50Z","timestamp":1776743090280,"version":"3.51.2"},"reference-count":30,"publisher":"Georg Thieme Verlag KG","issue":"15","content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Am J Perinatol"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,11]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:p>This study aimed to assess clinical efficiency and maternal and neonatal outcomes for patients who underwent outpatient cervical ripening using mechanical methods (osmotic dilators and Foley balloon) compared with patients who underwent inpatient ripening.<\/jats:p><jats:p>A retrospective cohort study from March 2020 to March 2022 compared patients with low-risk, term, singleton pregnancies who underwent outpatient cervical ripening to clinically similar patients who had inpatient ripening. Inverse probability of treatment weighting for analysis of outcomes to account for differences in groups and comparisons of outcomes are reported as mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).<\/jats:p><jats:p>The cohort included 391 patients (116 outpatient, 275 inpatient). Among the outpatient group, half used only mechanical devices, and all others received additional pharmacological methods after admission for labor induction. Among the inpatient group, the most common cervical ripening method was pharmacological only (66.2%), followed by both pharmacological and mechanical (25.8%), and 8% used only mechanical. After outpatient cervical ripening, patients had significantly higher cervical dilation (mean difference 1.9\u2009cm, 95% CI: 1.6, 2.3) and simplified bishop scores (mean difference 1.6, 95% CI: 1.2, 2.1) on admission compared with the inpatient group. The average time from admission to delivery was 5.8\u2009hours shorter (95% CI: \u22128.6, \u22122.9) for the outpatient group compared with the inpatient group, and the average total length of stay was 7.1\u2009hours shorter (95% CI: \u221212.1, \u22122.1) for the outpatients among patients with vaginal deliveries. Both groups had similar hours of oxytocin use, and mode of delivery, and did not differ for maternal complications or neonatal outcomes.<\/jats:p><jats:p>Outpatient cervical ripening using multiple mechanical methods was associated with significantly higher cervical dilation, shorter average time from patient admission to delivery, and shorter total length of stay for vaginal deliveries. Outpatient cervical ripening may be an important option for easing resource utilization for induced labor.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1055\/a-2553-9258","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2025,3,29]],"date-time":"2025-03-29T19:36:27Z","timestamp":1743276987000},"page":"2013-2023","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":2,"title":["Comparison of Outpatient Mechanical Cervical Ripening Methods to Standard Inpatient Ripening"],"prefix":"10.1055","volume":"42","author":[{"given":"Mary P.","family":"Goering","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"United Hospital Mother Baby Center, Allina Health, Minneapolis, Minnesota"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Whitney L.","family":"Wunderlich","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Care Delivery Research, Allina Health, Minneapolis, Minnesota"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Marc C.","family":"Vacquier","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Care Delivery Research, Allina Health, Minneapolis, Minnesota"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"David A.","family":"Watson","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Children's Minnesota Research Institute, Children's Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Kelly A.","family":"Drake","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Abbott Northwestern Hospital Mother Baby Center, Allina Health, Minneapolis, Minnesota"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Sandra I.","family":"Hoffman","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Abbott Northwestern Hospital Mother Baby Center, Allina Health, Minneapolis, Minnesota"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-3382-9822","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Anna","family":"Schulte","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Care Delivery Research, Allina Health, Minneapolis, Minnesota"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Laura C.","family":"Colicchia","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Minnesota Perinatal Physicians, Allina Health, Minneapolis, Minnesota"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Abbey C.","family":"Sidebottom","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Care Delivery Research, Allina Health, Minneapolis, Minnesota"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"194","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2025,3,29]]},"reference":[{"issue":"155","key":"ref1","first-page":"1","article-title":"Recent declines in induction of labor by gestational age","author":"M J Osterman","year":"2014","journal-title":"NCHS Data Brief"},{"issue":"06","key":"ref2","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"513","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa1800566","article-title":"Labor induction versus expectant management in low-risk nulliparous women","volume":"379","author":"W A Grobman","year":"2018","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"issue":"09","key":"ref3","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"813","DOI":"10.1056\/NEJMoa1509117","article-title":"Randomized trial of labor induction in women 35 years of age or older","volume":"374","author":"K FBG Walker","year":"2016","journal-title":"N Engl J Med"},{"issue":"04","key":"ref4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"304","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2019.02.046","article-title":"Elective induction of labor at 39 weeks compared with expectant management: a meta-analysis of cohort studies","volume":"221","author":"W ACA Grobman","year":"2019","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"02","key":"ref5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"255","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000004644","article-title":"Outpatient cervical ripening with balloon catheters: a systematic review and meta-analysis","volume":"139","author":"R Pierce-Williams","year":"2022","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"04","key":"ref6","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"583","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ogc.2017.08.010","article-title":"Is there a place for outpatient preinduction cervical ripening?","volume":"44","author":"B Leopold","year":"2017","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am"},{"key":"ref7","first-page":"e71","article-title":"Patient satisfaction with outpatient cervical ripening in parous women","volume":"38","author":"M JJV Wang","year":"2020","journal-title":"Am J Perinatol"},{"issue":"15","key":"ref8","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2954","DOI":"10.1080\/14767058.2020.1811665","article-title":"Outpatient management of pre-induction cervical ripening","volume":"35","author":"V Chen","year":"2022","journal-title":"J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med"},{"key":"ref9","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2016.11.026","article-title":"Outpatient versus inpatient cervix priming with Foley catheter: A randomized trial","volume":"210","author":"C Policiano","year":"2017","journal-title":"Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol"},{"issue":"03","key":"ref10","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"245","DOI":"10.1055\/s-0039-1694791","article-title":"Outpatient cervical ripening: a cost-minimization and threshold analysis","volume":"37","author":"S LBA Son","year":"2020","journal-title":"Am J Perinatol"},{"issue":"06","key":"ref11","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"488","DOI":"10.1053\/j.semperi.2015.07.014","article-title":"Outpatient cervical ripening","volume":"39","author":"J M Amorosa","year":"2015","journal-title":"Semin Perinatol"},{"key":"ref12","first-page":"751","article-title":"Transcervical Foley catheter for preinduction cervical ripening in an outpatient versus inpatient setting","volume":"98","author":"A C Sciscione","year":"2001","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"09","key":"ref13","first-page":"781","article-title":"The timing of adverse events with Foley catheter preinduction cervical ripening; implications for outpatient use","volume":"31","author":"A CBC Sciscione","year":"2014","journal-title":"Am J Perinatol"},{"issue":"01","key":"ref14","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"94","DOI":"10.1111\/1471-0528.12846","article-title":"A randomised controlled trial of outpatient compared with inpatient cervical ripening with prostaglandin E2 (OPRA study)","volume":"122","author":"C Wilkinson","year":"2015","journal-title":"BJOG"},{"issue":"03","key":"ref15","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"275.e1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2019.01.008","article-title":"A randomized controlled trial of Dilapan-S vs Foley balloon for preinduction cervical ripening (DILAFOL trial)","volume":"220","author":"A FVJ Saad","year":"2019","journal-title":"Am J Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"03","key":"ref16","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"693","DOI":"10.1007\/s11845-017-1731-8","article-title":"A prospective pilot study of Dilapan-S compared with propess for induction of labour at 41+ weeks in nulliparous pregnancy","volume":"187","author":"D A Crosby","year":"2018","journal-title":"Ir J Med Sci"},{"issue":"12","key":"ref17","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"e0189665","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0189665","article-title":"Hygroscopic dilators vs balloon catheter ripening of the cervix for induction of labor in nulliparous women at term: retrospective study","volume":"12","author":"R Shindo","year":"2017","journal-title":"PLoS One"},{"issue":"03","key":"ref18","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.15436\/2380-5595.15.015","article-title":"Cervical ripening with an osmotic dilator (Dilapan-S) in term pregnancies - an observational study","volume":"1","author":"J T Maier","year":"2015","journal-title":"Journal of Gynecology and Neonatal Biology."},{"issue":"03","key":"ref19","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"299","DOI":"10.1515\/jpm-2017-0029","article-title":"Induction of labor in patients with an unfavorable cervix after a cesarean using an osmotic dilator versus vaginal prostaglandin","volume":"46","author":"J T Maier","year":"2018","journal-title":"J Perinat Med"},{"key":"ref20","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"70","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ejogrb.2018.08.004","article-title":"Synthetic osmotic dilators in the induction of labour-an international multicentre observational study","volume":"229","author":"J Gupta","year":"2018","journal-title":"Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol"},{"issue":"04","key":"ref21","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"584","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000004942","article-title":"Outpatient compared with inpatient preinduction cervical ripening using a synthetic osmotic dilator: a randomized clinical trial","volume":"140","author":"A F Saad","year":"2022","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"09","key":"ref22","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1180","DOI":"10.1515\/jpm-2022-0196","article-title":"Cervical ripening as an outpatient procedure in the pandemic - minimizing the inpatient days and lowering the socioeconomic costs","volume":"50","author":"J Kummer","year":"2022","journal-title":"J Perinat Med"},{"issue":"04","key":"ref23","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"805","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0b013e3182114ad2","article-title":"Using a simplified Bishop score to predict vaginal delivery","volume":"117","author":"S K Laughon","year":"2011","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"issue":"28","key":"ref24","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"3661","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.6607","article-title":"Moving towards best practice when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies","volume":"34","author":"P C Austin","year":"2015","journal-title":"Stat Med"},{"issue":"01","key":"ref25","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"20","DOI":"10.1002\/sim.2739","article-title":"The design versus the analysis of observational studies for causal effects: parallels with the design of randomized trials","volume":"26","author":"D B Rubin","year":"2007","journal-title":"Stat Med"},{"issue":"03","key":"ref26","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"597","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0000000000004041","article-title":"Outpatient foley catheter for induction of labor in nulliparous women: a randomized controlled trial","volume":"136","author":"E B Ausbeck","year":"2020","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"ref27","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"689115","DOI":"10.3389\/fpubh.2021.689115","article-title":"Out-of-hospital cervical ripening with a synthetic hygroscopic cervical dilator may reduce hospital costs and cesarean sections in the United States-a cost-consequence analysis","volume":"9","author":"S J Saunders","year":"2021","journal-title":"Front Public Health"},{"issue":"11","key":"ref28","first-page":"CD007372","article-title":"Outpatient versus inpatient induction of labour for improving birth outcomes","author":"A J Kelly","year":"2013","journal-title":"Cochrane Database Syst Rev"},{"issue":"02","key":"ref29","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"343","DOI":"10.1002\/ijgo.14625","article-title":"Safety, effectiveness, women's experience, and economic costs of outpatient induction in women with uncomplicated pregnancies: A systematic review and meta-analyses","volume":"161","author":"H Sangsk\u00e4r","year":"2023","journal-title":"Int J Gynaecol Obstet"},{"issue":"04","key":"ref30","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"574","DOI":"10.1111\/birt.12568","article-title":"Outpatient Foley catheter induction protocol provides clinical and cost benefits","volume":"48","author":"M C Washburn","year":"2021","journal-title":"Birth"}],"container-title":["American Journal of Perinatology"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/www.thieme-connect.de\/products\/ejournals\/pdf\/10.1055\/a-2553-9258.pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,16]],"date-time":"2025-10-16T22:45:15Z","timestamp":1760654715000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"http:\/\/www.thieme-connect.de\/DOI\/DOI?10.1055\/a-2553-9258"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2025,3,29]]},"references-count":30,"journal-issue":{"issue":"15","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2025,10,16]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,11]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1055\/a-2553-9258","archive":["Portico","CLOCKSS"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["0735-1631","1098-8785"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0735-1631","type":"print"},{"value":"1098-8785","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2025,3,29]]}}}