Abstract
In the 1930s, investigators in the US, Germany and Switzerland made the first attempts to quantify the course of labor in a clinically meaningful way. They emphasized the rupture of membranes as a pivotal event governing labor progress. Attention was also placed on the total number of contractions as a guide to normality. Beginning in the 1950s, Friedman determined that changes in cervical dilatation and fetal station over time were the most useful parameters for the assessment of labor progress. He showed all normal labors had similar patterns of dilatation and descent, differing only in the durations and slopes of their component parts. These observations led to the formulation of criteria that elevated the assessment of labor from a rather arbitrary exercise to one guided by scientific objectivity. Researchers worldwide confirmed the basic nature of labor curves and validated their functionality. This system allows us to quantify the effects of parity, analgesia, maternal obesity, prior cesarean, maternal age, and fetal presentation and position on labor. It permits analysis of outcomes associated with labor aberrations, quantifies the effectiveness of treatments and assesses the need for cesarean delivery. Also, dysfunctional labor patterns serve as indicators of short- and long-term risks to offspring. We still lack the necessary translational research to link the physiologic manifestations of uterine contractility with changes in dilatation and descent. Recent efforts to interpret electrohysterographic patterns hold promise in this regard, as does preliminary exploration into the molecular basis of dysfunctional labor. For now, the clinician is best served by a system of labor assessment proposed more than 60 years ago and embellished upon in considerable detail since.
Author’s statement
Conflict of interest: Authors state no conflict of interest.
Material and methods: Informed consent: Informed consent has been obtained from all individuals included in this study.
Ethical approval: The research related to human subject use has complied with all the relevant national regulations, and institutional policies, and is in accordance with the tenets of the Helsinki Declaration, and has been approved by the authors’ institutional review board or equivalent committee.
References
[1] Graham H. Eternal Eve. The history of gynecology and obstetrics. Garden City: Doubleday & Company, 1951.Search in Google Scholar
[2] Williams JW. Obstetrics: a text-book for the use of students and practitioners. New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1903.Search in Google Scholar
[3] McClure EM, Goldenberg RL. Stillbirth in developing countries: a review of causes, risk factors and prevention strategies. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2009;22:183–90.10.1080/14767050802559129Search in Google Scholar
[4] Ngoc NT, Merialdi M, Abdel-Aleem H, Carroli G, Purwar M, Zavaleta N, et al. Causes of stillbirths and early neonatal deaths: data from 7993 pregnancies in six developing countries. Bull World Health Organ. 2006;84:699–705.10.2471/BLT.05.027300Search in Google Scholar
[5] Friedman EA, Neff RK. Labor and delivery: Impact on offspring. Littleton MA: PSG Publishing; 1987.Search in Google Scholar
[6] Calkins LA. The importance of the firm cervix in prolonged labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1954;67:801–9.10.1016/0002-9378(54)90104-0Search in Google Scholar
[7] Calkins LA. On predicting the length of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1941;42:802–13.10.1016/S0002-9378(41)90171-0Search in Google Scholar
[8] Calkins LA. The value of estimating the length of labor. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1959;2:322–31.10.1097/00003081-195902020-00007Search in Google Scholar
[9] Frey E. Die Bedeutung der Wehentafel für die Physiologie und Pathologie der Geburt beim worzeitigen Blasensprung. Schweiz Med Wochenschr. 1929;59:613–20.Search in Google Scholar
[10] Wolf W. Der unzeitige Blasensprung. Stuttgart, Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft, 1946:103.Search in Google Scholar
[11] Koller T. Versuch einer graphischen Darstellung des Geburtsverlaufes. Gynaecologia. 1948;126:227.Search in Google Scholar
[12] Zimmer K. Die Muttermundseröffnung bei den Schädellagen im Wegzeit-Diagramm. Arch Gynäkol. 1951;179:495–513.10.1007/BF00996159Search in Google Scholar
[13] Bishop EH. Pelvic scoring for elective induction. Obstet Gynecol. 1964;24:266–8.Search in Google Scholar
[14] Calkins LA. The second stage of labor; number of pains. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1949;57:106–12.10.1016/0002-9378(49)90411-1Search in Google Scholar
[15] Geisendorf W. Le nombre des contractions dans l’accouchement dirigé. Gynecol Obstet (Paris). 1937;35:355.Search in Google Scholar
[16] Friedman EA. The graphic analysis of labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1954;68:1568–75.10.1016/0002-9378(54)90311-7Search in Google Scholar
[17] Friedman EA. Primigravid labor: a graphicostatistical analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 1955;6:567–89.10.1097/00006250-195512000-00001Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[18] Friedman EA. Labor in multiparas: a graphicostatistical analysis. Obstet Gynecol. 1956;8:691–703.10.1097/00006250-195612000-00007Search in Google Scholar
[19] Friedman EA. Labor. Clinical evaluation and management. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts; 1967.Search in Google Scholar
[20] Friedman EA. Labor. Clinical evaluation and management, 2nd ed. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1978.Search in Google Scholar
[21] Friedman EA, Kroll BH. Computer analysis of labour progression. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Commonw. 1969;76:1075–9.10.1111/j.1471-0528.1969.tb05788.xSearch in Google Scholar
[22] Bottoms SF, Hirsch VJ, Sokol RJ. Medical management of arrest disorders of labor: a current overview. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1987;156:935–9.10.1016/0002-9378(87)90360-7Search in Google Scholar
[23] Sokol RJ, Stojkov J, Chik L, Rosen MG. Normal and abnormal labor progress: I. a quantitative assessment and survey of the literature. J Reprod Med. 1977;18:47–53.Search in Google Scholar
[24] Duignan NM, Studd JW, Hughes AO. Characteristics of normal labour in different racial groups. Br J Obstet Gynecol. 1975;82:593–601.10.1111/j.1471-0528.1975.tb00695.xSearch in Google Scholar
[25] Hendricks CH, Brenner WE, Kraus G. Normal cervical dilatation pattern in late pregnancy and labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1970;106:1065–82.10.1016/S0002-9378(16)34092-3Search in Google Scholar
[26] Ledger WJ. Monitoring of labor by graphs. Obstet Gynecol. 1969;34:174–81.Search in Google Scholar
[27] Ledger WJ, Witting WC. The use of a cervical dilatation graph in the management of primigravidae in labour. J Obstet Gynecol Br Commonw. 1972;79:710–4.10.1111/j.1471-0528.1972.tb12905.xSearch in Google Scholar
[28] Evans MI, Lachman E, Kral S, Melmed H. Predictive value of cervical dilatation rates in labor in multiparous women. Isr J Med Sci. 1976;12:1399–403.Search in Google Scholar
[29] Melmed H, Evans M. Predictive value of cervical dilatation rates. I. primipara labor. Obstet Gynecol. 1976;47:511–5.Search in Google Scholar
[30] Kwast BE, Lennox CE, Farley TM. World Health Organization partograph in management of labour. Lancet. 1994;343: 1399–404.Search in Google Scholar
[31] Studd J, Clegg DR, Sanders RR, Hughes AO. Identification of high risk labours by labour nomogram. Br Med J. 1975;2:545–7.10.1136/bmj.2.5970.545Search in Google Scholar
[32] Philpott RH, Castle WM. Cervicographs in the management of labour in primigravidae. II. the action line and treatment of abnormal labour. J Obstet Gynaecol Br Commonw. 1972;79:599–602.10.1111/j.1471-0528.1972.tb14208.xSearch in Google Scholar
[33] Van Bogaert L–J. The partogram’s result and neonatal outcome. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2006;26:321–4.10.1080/01443610600594963Search in Google Scholar
[34] Drouin P, Nkounawa F. The value of the partogramme in the management of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 1979;53:741–5.Search in Google Scholar
[35] Cibils LA, Hendricks CH. Normal labor in vertex presentation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1965;91:385–95.10.1016/0002-9378(65)90254-1Search in Google Scholar
[36] Juntunen J, Kirkinen P. Partogram of a grand multipara: different descent slope compared with an ordinary parturient. J Perinat Med. 1994;22:213–8.10.1097/00006254-199504000-00010Search in Google Scholar
[37] Lekprasert V. Monitoring of labour by graph. J Med Assoc Thai. 1972;55:647–53.Search in Google Scholar
[38] Peisner DB, Rosen MG. Transition from latent to active labor. Obstet Gynecol. 1986;68:448–51.Search in Google Scholar
[39] Duncan GR, Costello E. The partogram: a graphic guide to progress in labour. N Z Med J. 1975;82:193–5.Search in Google Scholar
[40] Incerti M, Locatelli A, Ghidini A, Ciriello E, Consonni S, Pezzullo JC. Variability in rate of cervical dilatation in nulliparous women at term. Birth. 2011;38:30–5.10.1111/j.1523-536X.2010.00443.xSearch in Google Scholar
[41] Friedman EA, Cervimetry: an objective method for the study of cervical dilatation in labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1956:71:1189–93.10.1016/0002-9378(56)90424-0Search in Google Scholar
[42] Friedman EA, Von Micsky LI. Electronic cervimeter: a research instrument for the study of cervical dilatation in labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1963;87:789–93.Search in Google Scholar
[43] Zador I, Neuman MR, Wolfson RN. Continuous monitoring of cervical dilatation during labour by ultrasonic transit time measurement. Med Biol Engineering. 1976;14:299–305.10.1007/BF02478125Search in Google Scholar
[44] Kok FT, Wallenburg HCS, Wladimiroff JW. Ultrasonic measurement of cervical dilatation during labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1976;126:288–90.10.1016/0002-9378(76)90295-7Search in Google Scholar
[45] Eijskoot F, Storm J, Kok F, Wallenburg H, Wladimiroff J. An ultrasonic device for continuous measurement of cervical dilatation during labor. Ultrasonics. 1977;15:183–5.10.1016/0041-624X(77)90052-XSearch in Google Scholar
[46] Richardson JA, Sutherland IA, Allen DW. A cervimeter for continuous measurement of cervical dilatation in labour: preliminary results. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1978;85:178–84.10.1111/j.1471-0528.1978.tb10477.xSearch in Google Scholar
[47] Sharf Y, Farine D, Batzalel M, Megel Y, Shenhav M, Jaffa A, et al. Continuous monitoring of cervical dilatation and fetal head station during labor. Med Eng Phys. 2007;29:61–71.10.1016/j.medengphy.2006.01.005Search in Google Scholar
[48] van Dessel HJ, Frijns JH, Kok FT, Wallenburg HC. Ultrasound assessment of cervical dynamics during the first stage of labor. Eur J Obstet Gynecol. 1994;53:123–7.10.1016/0028-2243(94)90219-4Search in Google Scholar
[49] Breeveld-Dwarkasing VN, Struijk PC, Lotgering FK, Eijskoot F, Kindahl H, van der Weijden GC, et al. Cervical dilatation related to uterine electromyographic activity and endocrinological changes during prostaglandin F2α-induced parturition in cows. Biol Reprod. 2003;68:536–42.10.1095/biolreprod.102.005900Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[50] Cohen WR, Newman L, Friedman EA: Frequency of labor disorders with advancing maternal age. Obstet Gynecol. 1980;55:414–6.Search in Google Scholar
[51] Chazotte C, Madden R, Cohen WR. Labor patterns in women with previous cesareans. Obstet Gynecol. 1990;75(3 Pt1): 350–5.Search in Google Scholar
[52] Verdiales M, Pacheco C, Cohen WR. Effect of maternal obesity on the course of labor. J Perinat Med. 2009;37:651–5.10.1515/JPM.2009.110Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[53] Bugg GJ, Siddiqui F, Thornton JG. Oxytocin versus no treatment or delayed treatment for slow progress in the first stage of spontaneous labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013; CD007123. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007123.pub3.Review.10.1002/14651858.CD007123.pub3.ReviewSearch in Google Scholar
[54] Steer PJ, Carter MC, Beard RW. The effect of oxytocin infusion on uterine activity in slow labour. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1985;92:1120–6.10.1111/j.1471-0528.1985.tb03022.xSearch in Google Scholar
[55] Friedman EA, Sachtleben MR. Dysfunctional labor. II. protracted active-phase dilatation in the nullipara. Obstet Gynecol. 1961;17:566–78.10.1097/00006254-196110000-00012Search in Google Scholar
[56] Gross T, Sokol RJ, Williams T, Thompson K. Shoulder dystocia: a fetal-physician risk. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1987;156:1408–18.10.1016/0002-9378(87)90008-1Search in Google Scholar
[57] Hopwood HG. Shoulder dystocia: fifteen years’ experience in a community hospital. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1982;144:162–6.10.1016/0002-9378(82)90619-6Search in Google Scholar
[58] Weizsaecker K, Deaver JR, Cohen WR. Labour characteristics and neonatal Erb’s palsy. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2007;114:1003–9.10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01392.xSearch in Google Scholar
[59] Deaver JE, Cohen WR: An approach to the prediction of neonatal Erb palsy. J Perinat Med. 2009;37:150–5.10.1515/JPM.2009.021Search in Google Scholar
[60] Friedman EA, Sachtleben MA, Bresky PA. Dysfunctional labor. XII. Long-term effects on infant. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1977;127:779–83.10.1016/0002-9378(77)90257-5Search in Google Scholar
[61] Friedman EA. Patterns of labor as indicators of risk. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1973;16:172–83.10.1097/00003081-197303000-00010Search in Google Scholar
[62] Friedman EA, Sachtleben-Murray MR, Dahrouge D, Neff RK. Long-term effects of labor and delivery on offspring: a matched-pair analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1984;150: 941–5.10.1016/0002-9378(84)90386-7Search in Google Scholar
[63] Towner D, Castro MA, Eby-Wilkens E, Gilbert WM. Effects of mode of delivery of nulliparous women on neonatal intracranial injury. N Engl J Med. 1999;341:1709–14.10.1056/NEJM199912023412301Search in Google Scholar
[64] Sorbe B, Dahlgren S. Some important factors in the molding of the fetal head during vaginal delivery – a photographic study. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1983;21:2005–12.10.1016/0020-7292(83)90081-4Search in Google Scholar
[65] Amiel-Tison C, Sureau C, Shnider SM. Cerebral handicap in full-term neonates related to the mechanical forces of labour. Baillieres Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1988;2:145–65.10.1016/S0950-3552(88)80069-5Search in Google Scholar
[66] Niswander KR, Gordon MJ. The women and their pregnancies: the Collaborative Perinatal Study of the National Institute of Neurological Diseases and Stroke. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD; 1972.Search in Google Scholar
[67] Schifrin BS, Deymier P, Cohen WR. Fetal neurological injury related to mechanical forces of labor and delivery. In: Zhang L, editor. Stress and developmental programming in health and disease: beyond phenomenology. New York: Nova Science; 2014. p. 651–88.Search in Google Scholar
[68] American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Neonatal encephalopathy and cerebral palsy: defining the pathogenesis and pathophysiology. Washington, DC: American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists; 2003.Search in Google Scholar
[69] Mann LI, Carmichael A, Duchin, S. The effect of head compression on FHR, brain metabolism and function. Obstet Gynecol. 1972;39:721–6.Search in Google Scholar
[70] Ghosh N, Recker R, Shah A, Bhanu B, Ashwal S, Obenaus A. Automated ischemic lesion detection in a neonatal model of hypoxic ischemic injury. J Magn Res Imaging. 2011;33:772–81.10.1002/jmri.22488Search in Google Scholar
[71] Yeh P, Emary K, Impey L. The relationship between umbilical cord arterial pH and serious adverse neonatal outcome: analysis of 51,519 consecutive validated samples. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 2012;119:824–31.10.1097/01.aoa.0000432374.98570.01Search in Google Scholar
[72] Ruth VJ, Raivio KO. Perinatal brain damage: predictive value of metabolic acidosis and the Apgar score. Br Med J. 1988;297:24–7.10.1097/00006254-198904000-00014Search in Google Scholar
[73] Cowan F, Rutherford M, Groenendaal F, Eken P, Mercuri E, Bydder GM, et al. Origin and timing of brain lesions in term infants with neonatal encephalopathy. Lancet. 2003;361: 736–42.10.1016/S0140-6736(03)12658-XSearch in Google Scholar
[74] Smellie W. A Treatise on the theory and practice of Midwifery. London; 1752.Search in Google Scholar
[75] Little WJ. On the influence of abnormal parturition, difficult labors, premature birth, and asphyxia neonatorum, on the mental and physical conditions of the child, especially in relation to deformities. Trans Obstet Soc Lond. 1862;3:293–344.Search in Google Scholar
[76] Pu F, Xu L, Li D, Shuyu L, Sun L, Wang L, et al. Effect of different labor forces on fetal skull molding. Med Eng Phys. 2011;33:620–5.10.1016/j.medengphy.2010.12.018Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[77] Cahill AG, Tuuli MG. Labor in 2013: the new frontier. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2013;209:531–4.10.1016/j.ajog.2013.04.016Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[78] Zhang J, Troendle JF, Yancey MK. Reassessing the labor curve in nulliparous women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002;187:824–8.10.1067/mob.2002.127142Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[79] Zhang J, Troendle J, Mikolajczyk R, Sundaram R, Beaver J, Fraser W. The natural history of the normal first stage of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115;705–10.10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181d55925Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[80] Zhang J, Landy HJ, Branch DW, Burkman R, Haberman S, Gregory KD, et al. Contemporary patterns of spontaneous labor with normal neonatal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116:1281–7.10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181fdef6eSearch in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[81] Laughon SK, Branch DW, Beaver J, Zhang J. Changes in labor patterns over 50 years. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012:206:419.e1–9.10.1016/j.ajog.2012.03.003Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[82] Obstetric Care Consensus Number 1. Safe prevention of the primary cesarean delivery. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:693–711.10.1097/01.AOG.0000444441.04111.1dSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
[83] Cohen WR, Friedman EA. Perils of the new labor management guidelines. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212:420–7.10.1016/j.ajog.2014.09.008Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[84] Cohen WR, Friedman EA. Viewpoint: Misguided guidelines for managing labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;212:753.e1–310.1016/j.ajog.2015.04.012Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[85] Montgomery DC, Peck EA, Vining GG. Introduction to linear regression analysis, 5th ed. London: John Wiley & Sons, 2012:7.1.Search in Google Scholar
[86] Wray S. Insights from physiology to myometrial function and dysfunction. Exp Physiol. 2015;100:1468–76.10.1113/EP085131Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[87] Hayes-Gill B, Hassan S, Mirza F, Ommani S, Himsworth J, Solomon M, et al. Accuracy and reliability of uterine contraction identification using abdominal surface electrodes. Clin Med Insights Womens Health. 2012;5:65–75.10.4137/CMWH.S10444Search in Google Scholar
[88] Euliano TY, Marossero D, Nguyen MT, Euliano NR, Principe J, Edwards RK. Spatiotemporal electrohysterography patterns in normal and arrested labor. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;200:54.e1–7.10.1016/j.ajog.2008.09.008Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[89] Chaemsaithong P, Madan I, Romero R, Than NG, Tarca AL, Draghici S. Characterization of the myometrial transcriptome in women with an arrest of dilatation during labor. J Perinat Med. 2013;41:665–81.10.1515/jpm-2013-0086Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
[90] Cohen WR, Friedman EA. Labor and delivery care: a practical guide. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.; 2011.10.1002/9781119971566Search in Google Scholar
©2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
