الفهرس 
Acknowledgements
Bishop and Modified Bishop scoreOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 106 |  |  |
| | | from | 106 | | |
Abstract
In view of the gradual increase in the proportion of women being induced worldwide, it would be of interest to provide accurate information on the chances of success of induction. Several recently-published models demonstrate good discriminatory ability for predicting the success of labour induction. The Bishop score, developed in 1964, is the most frequently used predictive score for the success of a labour induction. The consistency, position, dilation, effacement, and foetal head station are the five parameters that make up this measurement, which is based on a vaginal examination. Although its predictive abilities seem limited, this score was initially developed only for oxytocin induction in multiparous women. Although several induction scores have been put forth to take the place of the Bishop score, none have become the de facto norm. Additionally, none of these scores were specifically devoted to induction of labour with cervical ripening. We enrolled 410 women who were eligible for induction of labour for various indications in this study with the goal of evaluating the efficacy of various models in predicting successful induction of labour. These models included the 50-point scoring system, Levine scoring system, Manipal ultrsound scoring system, Bishop score, modified Bishop score, and Induction calculator score A total of 306 (74.6%) of the enrolled women delivered vaginally with a successful induction of labour, while 104 (25.4%) of the women underwent caesarean sections. Indications of cesarean section in the current study were fetal distress, failed progress and failed induction in 57 (54.8%), 34 (32.7%) and 13 (12.5%) women, respectively. The findings of the current study stated that the best diagnostic accuracy was noticed with Levine scoring system (77.2%) and the 50-point scoring system (76.4%) while the Manipal ultrasound scoring system had the least accuracy (50.9%). In comparison different scoring systems in this study with the standard Bishop score, we found that modified Bishop, Manipal US scoring system and Levin scoring system were comparable to Bishop score but each of the 50-point scoring system and induction calculator score were better than Bishop score.
In conclusion, the importance of predicting the success of vaginal birth following induction of labor and its potential impact on healthcare utilization is being appreciated, which is evident from the rapid increase in the derivation of prediction models. However, the lack of external validation of most published models and limitations related to scope, methodology and/or assessment of performance in clinical settings make it difficult to recommend any one model for widespread clinical use.
There is an urgent need to validate existing models in diverse settings and to conduct prospective clinical studies to determine their impact on shared decision-making, parental satisfaction, caesarean birth rates, and resource utilization.