How often does an induction end in a caesarean?

[Miss E]

Thanks for the replies ladies... It is an interesting area. The reason I asked the question in the first place is because I'm jotting down notes for my birth plan at the moment and have been considering how I would feel about an induction. Personally, I want to wait two weeks after my due date before considering an induction (obviously if it is medically necessary for other reasons it's a different kettle of fish). But then I can't help but wonder if you are in the position where an induction is deemed absolutely necessary are you potentially better off electing to have a caesarean...

I had a look at that article you mentioned Trillian and it interestingly quoted some different figures:

'A midwife from a large Melbourne hospital recently confided that they see many women come in for inductions where both mother and baby are well, but sadly somewhere between 50-75% of first time mothers being induced are ending up with caesareans'

and

?The Doula Book?, written by Klaus, Kennell & Kennell, contains a study on Doulas and induced labour in Cleveland, USA. The overall epidural rate for those who were induced was 81% and caesarean rate 43%. This includes women who had professional support people with them and others without.'

Of the four women I know who have been induced, all have ended up having a caesarean (mostly after a very long and very painful labor). In fact Goth Mum you're the only one I know who hasn't had what they would describe as a traumatic labor. But I didn't know that there was an increased risk of post-partum haemorrhage either.

Like Jelly Bean said, if you're having an induction bubs usually isn't ready (or wanting might be a better word) to be born. To me it seems that the odds of the birthing experience being traumatic for mum and bub are pretty high, and if after all that trauma you are likely to end up having a caesear, then maybe you and bubs are better off skipping the induction and the risks associated with it, and going straight for the caesarean... It kind of all depends on what the real rate of inductions that lead to a caesearing are.

Don't get me wrong, I'm really hoping to be able to have a natural active labor. But if that isn't possible because bubs needs to come out before they're ready for that and the odds of an induction ending in a caesar are 75% then I can't help but think we might both be better off going down that route...

[Bun]

FWIW, I am another case who was induced and ended up with an 'easy' vaginal birth after an 11 hour labour, and I was induced 2 weeks early due to high BP. It was VERY painful with no lead up at all, just instantaneous 2 min apart contractions, so I ended up having an epi, but all went well.

[TwinsMummy]

Same over here i was induced and was lucky enough to deliver naturally with the twins.... Was induced due to twin to twin transfusion ( one smaller twin) had a fabulous 5 hour labor delivery was perfect no tearing no stitches....

[mrsmac]

I was induced with my 1st due to high BP, on my due date, I had a very traumatic birth which ended up with epesiotomy (Sp?) and forceps but no c/s. With my 3rd i was induced 12 days early again high BP and I had an easy vaginal delivery.

[Tinks]

I was induced all 3 times and none of them resulted in a c-section.

[Sterla]

I was induced and ended up having an emergency c/s. I think in my case it would have ended in an emergency c/s anyway, as bub's heart rate was dropping before I was even induced. They induced me to give me a chance at a vaginal birth, but told me that it was possible that it could distress bub even more - which it did. Because there was already something wrong before I was induced, my chances of ending up having a c/s were already higher.

[Miss E]

Glad to hear there are lots of positive induction experiences... Clearly the odds aren't nearly as bad as I thought they may be. Thanks for sharing

[Fleur]

I was induced and ended up having an emergency c/s. I think in my case it would have ended in an emergency c/s anyway, as bub's heart rate was dropping before I was even induced. They induced me to give me a chance at a vaginal birth, but told me that it was possible that it could distress bub even more - which it did. Because there was already something wrong before I was induced, my chances of ending up having a c/s were already higher.

- Exactly the same situation with my DS2, when they did get him out, he had severe cord entanglement which would have accounted for both the failure to go into labour / progress and the heart rate dropping... I can't see how he would NOT have been a CS.
Having said that, it is not an experience I am keen to repeat.

One question that continues to arise for me, is , WHY if a 'normal gestation' is 38 - 42 weeks are babies routinely being induced at 41+10? My DS1 arrived all on his own at 42+1 (I refused to go to hospital - not that I recommend that) after a 3hr labour, and he was perfectly fine.

This time around I am hoping for a VBAC, I have asked the OB to be allowed to go past 41+10, and she agreed to 41+13 , possibly with a CTG & Scan to make sure everything is ok, and I'm pretty happy with that. I also have the option at that point to elect for a CS rather than induction, and I am not sure yet how I feel about either option - I do not want another CS but I don't want to be induced either! I will be trying everything I can from 38 weeks to bring it on

and finally after re-reading all of the above, and considering some of the posts from Mums who have had inductions ending in successful VB's, I think it would be better to try the induction rather than just opt for a CS - at least to give it a chance to happen, kwim? and keeping in mind that some labours just do end in CS for whatever reason, things don't always go to plan.

Hey with a bit of luck it won't even be an issue for you..
Good Luck