{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,9,20]],"date-time":"2026-09-20T21:44:58Z","timestamp":1789940698087,"version":"4.0.1"},"reference-count":25,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2017,12,21]],"date-time":"2017-12-21T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1513814400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["J of Obstet and Gynaecol"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2018,1]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:p>We searched Embase, PubMed and the Cochrane Library for randomized or quasi\u2010randomized controlled trials to compare the use of single\u2010balloon to double\u2010balloon catheters. The risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated using fixed\u2010effects or random\u2010effects models.<\/jats:p><jats:p>Four studies involving a total of 793 pregnant women were included. There were no significant differences in the rate of cesarean (RR\u20091.09, 95% CI 0.86, 1.38; <jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20090.48), or vaginal deliveries within 24\u2009h (RR\u20090.94, 95% CI 0.82, 1.09; <jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20090.42), the mean time to delivery (MD\u20090.39, 95% CI \u22120.90, 1.68\u2009h; <jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20090.55) or Bishop score improvement (MD\u20090.62, 95%CI \u22120.18, 1.42; <jats:italic>P<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20090.13) between the groups. Women who received the double\u2010balloon catheter had a similar risk of maternal intrapartum fever and post\u2010partum hemorrhage. Pain during ripening was only reported in one trial and was significantly higher with the double balloon, whereas pain during device insertion was measured in two trials: one reported no difference while the other reported significantly increased pain with the double balloon.<\/jats:p><jats:p>The double\u2010balloon and single\u2010balloon (Foley) catheters had similar effectiveness and safety. The Foley catheter is significantly cheaper, widely available and accessible, has a longer history of use and remains the logical choice over the double\u2010balloon catheter for cervical ripening.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1111\/jog.13551","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2017,12,23]],"date-time":"2017-12-23T15:40:18Z","timestamp":1514043618000},"page":"27-34","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":46,"title":["Double\u2010balloon versus single\u2010balloon catheter for cervical ripening and labor induction: A systematic review and meta\u2010analysis"],"prefix":"10.1111","volume":"44","author":[{"given":"Fang","family":"Yang","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Obstetrics The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University  Nanning Guangxi China"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Shijin","family":"Huang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Gynecology The Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University  Nanning Guangxi China"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Yu","family":"Long","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Obstetrics The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University  Nanning Guangxi China"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Lingling","family":"Huang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Obstetrics The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University  Nanning Guangxi China"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2017,12,21]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_7_2_1","volume-title":"World Health Organization, UNICEF, United Nations Population Fund. Managing Complication in Pregnancy and Childbirth: A Guide for Midwives and Doctors","year":"2000"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_3_1","volume-title":"World Health Organization, Department of Reproductive Health and Research. WHO Recommendations for Induction of Labour","year":"2011"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_4_1","volume-title":"Williams Obstetrics","author":"Cunningham FG","year":"2014"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_5_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1053\/j.semperi.2015.07.006"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_6_1","first-page":"146","article-title":"Nonpharmaceutical ripening of the unfavorable cervix and induction of labor by a novel double balloon device","volume":"77","author":"Atad J","year":"1991","journal-title":"Obstet Gynecol"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_7_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/GCO.0000000000000027"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_8_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(11)61484-0"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_9_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2010.04.038"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_10_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2012.05.020"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_11_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1515\/jpm-2013-0152"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_12_1","first-page":"CD001233","article-title":"Mechanical methods for induction of labour","author":"Jozwiak M","year":"2012","journal-title":"Cochrane Database Syst Rev"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_13_1","unstructured":"HigginsJPT GreenS. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration 2011. Available from URL:www.Cochrane-handbook.org."},{"key":"e_1_2_7_14_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.1471-0528.2009.02279.x"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_15_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/AOG.0b013e318220e4b7"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_16_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3109\/14767058.2011.591459"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_17_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3109\/14767058.2015.1067297"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_18_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/00006254-199610000-00022"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_19_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2016.09.082"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_20_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2013.05.028"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_21_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S1701-2163(15)30509-0"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_22_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3109\/14767058.2013.879704"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_23_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2009.10.329"},{"issue":"3","key":"e_1_2_7_24_1","first-page":"229A","article-title":"Cervical ripening with extra amniotic saline infusion: A randomized comparison of two mechanical devices","volume":"19","author":"Mei\u2010Dan E","year":"2012","journal-title":"Reprod Sci"},{"issue":"159","key":"e_1_2_7_25_1","first-page":"S85","article-title":"Induction of labor with single\u2010 versus double\u2010balloon catheter \u2013 A randomized controlled trial","volume":"91","author":"Haugland B","year":"2012","journal-title":"Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_26_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ajog.2009.10.325"}],"container-title":["Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.wiley.com\/onlinelibrary\/tdm\/v1\/articles\/10.1111%2Fjog.13551","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1111\/jog.13551","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,9,23]],"date-time":"2023-09-23T15:49:16Z","timestamp":1695484156000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1111\/jog.13551"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2017,12,21]]},"references-count":25,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2018,1]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1111\/jog.13551"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/jog.13551","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["1341-8076","1447-0756"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1341-8076","type":"print"},{"value":"1447-0756","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2017,12,21]]}}}