Skip to main content

Table 1 Characteristics of the included trials

From: Double- versus single-balloon catheters for labour induction and cervical ripening: a meta-analysis

Study

Period

Country

Method

Sample size total (double/single)

Parity total (double/single)

Balloon Catheter

Doublex

Singley

Ahmed 2016

2013.03–2014.04

Egypt

RCT

78 (39/39)

all nulliparous

Cook

Foley (50 ml)

Haugland 2012

2010.03–2011.01

Norway

RCT

178 (88/90)

NA

Cook

Foley (NA)

Hoppe 2015

2010.01–2013.11

USA

RCT

98 (50/48)

nulliparous: 50 (25/25)

multiparous: 48 (25/23)

Cook

Foley (30 ml)

Pennell 2009*

2001.07–2003.12

Australia

RCT

217 (107/110)

all nulliparous

Atad

Foley (30 ml)

Rab 2015

2011.01–2013.12

Egypt

RCT

200 (100/100)

nulliparous: 113 (55/58)

multiparous: 87 (45/42)

Cook

Foley (30 ml)

Salim 2011

2008.06–2010.12

Israel

RCT

293 (148/145)

nulliparous: 155 (78/77)

multiparous: 138 (70/68)

Cook

Foley (60 ml)

Solt 2009

2006.01–2008.05

Israel

RCT

95 (45/50)§

nulliparous: 95 (45/50)

multiparous: 85 (NA)§

Cook

Foley (NA)

  1. Except for two studies [16, 21], in which we could not find detailed information, all studies offered similar standard instructions for how to use the balloon catheters
  2. x: COOK/Atad: 80 ml + 80 ml, without tension
  3. y: All Foley catheters were applied with light tension
  4. NA: Data not found: unable to contact the authors of the original reports
  5. *: Pennell 2009 [18] was a multi-arm study, and we only extracted data for the double-balloon catheter and single-balloon catheter comparison arms
  6. §: Solt 2009 [21] only reported the results of nulliparous women; therefore, we eliminated the multiparous subgroup and extracted nulliparous data only.