Wood R, Freret T, Clapp M, Little S. Rates of Induction of Labor at 39 weeks and cesarean delivery following publication of the ARRIVE Trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(8):E2328274.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Grobman WA, Rice MM, Reddy UM, Tita ATN, Silver RM, Mallett G, et al. Labor Induction versus Expectant Management in Low-Risk Nulliparous women. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(6):513–23.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Chen W, Xue J, Peprah M, Wen S, Walker M, Gao Y. A systematic review and network meta‐analysis comparing the use of Foley catheters, misoprostol, and dinoprostone for cervical ripening in the induction of labour. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecolog. 2016;123(3):346–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/14710528.1353.

Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Osterman MJK, Driscoll AK, Drake P. National Vital Statistics Reports Volume 67, Number 8, November 7, 2018 [Internet]. Vol. 67, National Vital Statistics Reports. 2017. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data_access/Vitalstatsonline.htm

Simpson KR. 47, MCN the American Journal of Maternal/Child nursing. Trends in Labor Induction in the United States, 1989 to 2020. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2022. p. 235.

Google Scholar 

Marconi AM. Recent advances in the induction of labor. F1000Research. Volume 8. F1000 Research Ltd; 2019.

Peel MD, Croll DMR, Kessler J, Haugland B, Pennell CE, Dickinson JE, et al. Double-vs single-balloon catheter for induction of labor: systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. Volume 102. John Wiley and Sons Inc; 2023. pp. 1440–9.

Wilkinson C, Adelson P, Turnbull D. A comparison of inpatient with outpatient balloon catheter cervical ripening: a pilot randomized controlled trial. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015;15(1).

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Pierce-Williams R, Lesser H, Saccone G, Harper L, Chen V, Sciscione A, et al. Outpatient cervical ripening with balloon catheters: a systematic review and Meta-analysis. Obstetrics and Gynecology. Volume 139. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2022. pp. 255–68.

Saad AF, Villarreal J, Eid J, Spencer N, Ellis V, Hankins GD. A randomized controlled trial of Dilapan-S vs Foley balloon for preinduction cervical ripening (DILAFOL trial). Am J Obstet Gyneco. 2019;220(3):275-e1–275.e9.

Article  Google Scholar 

Gavara R, Saad AF, Wapner RJ, Saade G, Fu A, Barrow R, et al. Cervical ripening efficacy of synthetic osmotic cervical dilator compared with oral misoprostol at term: a Randomized Controlled Trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2022;139(6):1083–91.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Gupta JK, Maher A, Stubbs C, Brocklehurst P, Daniels JP, Hardy P. A randomized trial of synthetic osmotic cervical dilator for induction of labor vs dinoprostone vaginal insert. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2022;4(4).

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

McDonagh M, Skelly AC, Tilden E, Brodt ED, Dana T, Hart E, et al. Outpatient cervical ripening: a systematic review and Meta-analysis. Obstetrics and Gynecology. Volume 137. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2021. pp. 1091–101.

McDonagh M, Skelly AC, Hermesch A, Tilden E, Brodt ED, Dana T et al. Cervical Ripening in the Outpatient Setting [Internet]. 2021 Mar. https://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/products/cervical-ripening/research

Wang H, Hong S, Liu Y, Duan Y, Yin H. Controlled-release dinoprostone insert versus Foley catheter for labor induction: a meta-analysi. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine. 2016;29(14):2382–8. https://doi.org/10.3109/14767058.2015.1086331.

Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Vilchez G, Meislin R, Lin L, Gonzalez K, McKinney J, Kaunitz A, et al. Outpatient cervical ripening and labor induction with low-dose vaginal misoprostol reduces the interval to delivery: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2024;230(3):s716–28.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Nicholson SM, Flood K, Dicker P, Molphy ZE, Smith OT, Oprescu CI et al. Outpatient elective induction of labour at 39 weeks’ gestation (HOME INDUCTION): an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase III, non-inferiority trial. EClinicalMedicine. 2024;74.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Son SL, Benson AE, Hayes EH, Subramaniam A, Clark EA, Einerson BD. 756: outpatient cervical ripening: a cost-minimization and threshold analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;220(1):S496.

Article  Google Scholar 

Caramel Avritscher EB, Saad AF, Han X, Thomas DJ, Saade GR. Economic evaluation of outpatient vs. inpatient cervical ripening using dilapan-s prior to induction of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2023;228(1):S631.

Article  Google Scholar 

Inpatient versus. Outpatient Induction of Labor Case [Internet]. https://www.acog.org/education-and-events/creog/curriculum-resources/cases-in-high-value-care/inpatient-versus-outpatient-induction-of-labor