Background: Breast stimulation to augment labor has been used for centuries
in tribal societies and by midwives. bl recent years it has been shown to
be effective in ripening the cervix inducing labor and as an alternative to
oxytocin for the contraction stress test. This study compared the effectiv
eness of breast stimulation with oxytocin infusion in augmenting labor. Met
hods: Women admitted to the labor ward were eligible for the study if they
had inadequate labor with premature rupture of the membranes and met inclus
ion criteria. They were assigned to oxytocin augmentation or breast stimula
tion (manual or pump), and were switched to oxytocin in the event of method
failure. Outcomes included time to delivery, intervention to delivery, pro
portion of spontaneous deliveries, and Apgar scores. One hundred participan
ts were needed in each am? of the study to demonstrate a 2- to 3-hour diffe
rence in delivery time, with a power of 80 percent. Results: Analysis was p
erformed on 79 women, of whom 49 were in the breast stimulation group and 3
0 in the oxytocin group. Sixty-five percent of the participants failed brea
st stimulation and were switched to oxytocin infusion, Although augmentatio
n start to delivery was shorter for the oxytocin group (p < 0.001), no diff
erences in total labor time occurred between the groups. Nulliparas receivi
ng breast stimulation had more spontaneous (relative risk 1.7, p = 0.04). a
nd fewer instrumental deliveries than those receiving oxytocin (relative ri
sk 0.2, p = 0.02). No significant differences in adverse fetal outcomes occ
urred between the study groups. Conclusions: The small number of participan
ts and a variety of problems with the conduct of the study prevented the fo
rmulation of reliable conclusions from the results. However the study provi
ded important insights into the feasibility and problems of developing a hi
gh-quality randomized trial of augmentation by breast stimulation.