Objective: To evaluate the performance of two previously published calculators in predicting cesarean delivery after induction of labor in an external population.
Methods: This was a cohort study including all nulliparous pregnant patients with singleton, term, vertex fetuses; intact membranes; and unfavorable cervices who underwent induction of labor between 2015 and 2017 at an academic tertiary care institution. Individual predicted cesarean risk scores were calculated with two previously published calculators. For each calculator, patients were stratified into three risk groups (lower, middle, and upper thirds) of approximately equivalent size. Predicted and observed incidences of cesarean delivery were compared with two-tailed binomial tests of probability in the overall population and in each risk group.
Results: A total of 846 patients met inclusion criteria, and 262 (31.0%) had cesarean deliveries, which was significantly lower than overall predicted rates of 40.0% and 36.2% with the two calculators (both P <.01). Both calculators significantly overestimated risk of cesarean delivery in higher risk tertiles (all P <.05). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic for both calculators were 0.57 or less in the overall population and in each risk group, suggesting poor predictive value. Higher predicted risk tertile in both calculators was not associated with any maternal or neonatal outcomes except wound infection.
Conclusion: Both previously published calculators had poor performance in this population, with neither calculator accurately predicting the incidence of cesarean delivery. Patients and health care professionals might be discouraged regarding trial of labor induction by falsely high predicted risk-of-cesarean scores. We caution against widespread implementation of these calculators without further population-specific refinement and adjustment.
Copyright © 2023 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.