1 Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Osterman MJ, Curtin SC, Matthews TJ. Births: final data for 2013. Natl Vital Stat Rep 2015; 64: 1–65.
2 Wing DA, Brown R, Plante LA, Miller H, Rugarn O, Powers BL. Misoprostol vaginal insert and time to vaginal delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2013; 122: 201–9.
3 Bolla D, Weissleder SV, Radan A-P, et al. Misoprostol vaginal insert versus misoprostol vaginal tablets for the induction of labour: a cohort study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2018; 18: 149.
4 Hokkila E, Kruit H, Rahkonen L, et al. The efficacy of misoprostol vaginal insert compared with oral misoprostol in the induction of labor of nulliparous women: A randomized national multicenter trial. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2019; published online Feb 16. DOI:10.1111/aogs.13580.
5 Hobson SR, Abdelmalek MZ, Farine D. Update on uterine tachysystole. J Perinat Med 2018; published online Oct 20. DOI:10.1515/jpm-2018-0175.
6 Heuser CC, Knight S, Esplin MS, et al. Tachysystole in term labor: incidence, risk factors, outcomes, and effect on fetal heart tracings. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 209: 32.e1-6.
7 Bakker PC a. M, Kurver PHJ, Kuik DJ, Van Geijn HP. Elevated uterine activity increases the risk of fetal acidosis at birth. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2007; 196: 313.e1-6.
8 Ahmed AI, Zhu L, Aldhaheri S, Sakr S, Minkoff H, Haberman S. Uterine tachysystole in spontaneous labor at term. J Matern-Fetal Neonatal Med 2016; 29: 3335–9.
9 Stewart RD, Bleich AT, Lo JY, Alexander JM, McIntire DD, Leveno KJ. Defining uterine tachysystole: how much is too much? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012; 207: 290.e1-6.
10 Smith S, Zacharias J, Lucas V, Warrick PA, Hamilton EF. Clinical associations with uterine tachysystole. J Matern-Fetal Neonatal Med 2014; 27: 709–13.
11 Bofill JA, Darby MM, Castillo J, Sawardecker SU, Magann EF, Morrison JC. Tachysystole Following Cervical Ripening and Induction of Labor Is Not Associated with Adverse Outcomes. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2017; 82: 487–93.
12 Rugarn O, Tipping D, Powers B, Wing DA. Induction of labour with retrievable prostaglandin vaginal inserts: outcomes following retrieval due to an intrapartum adverse event. BJOG 2017; 124: 796–803.
13 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 106: Intrapartum fetal heart rate monitoring: nomenclature, interpretation, and general management principles. Obstet Gynecol 2009; 114: 192–202.
14 Macones GA, Hankins GDV, Spong CY, Hauth J, Moore T. The 2008 National Institute of Child Health and Human Development workshop report on electronic fetal monitoring: update on definitions, interpretation, and research guidelines. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 37: 510–5.
15 Fermanian J. [Measurement of agreement between 2 judges. Qualitative cases]. Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique 1984; 32: 140–7.
16 Redling K, Schaedelin S, Huhn EA, Hoesli I. Efficacy and safety of misoprostol vaginal insert vs. oral misoprostol for induction of labor. J Perinat Med 2018; published online Sept 4. DOI:10.1515/jpm-2018-0128.
17 Rankin K, Chodankar R, Raymond K, Bhaskar S. Misoprostol vaginal insert versus dinoprostone vaginal insert: A comparison of labour and delivery outcomes. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2018; published online July 25. DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2018.07.025.
18 Simpson KR, James DC. Effects of oxytocin-induced uterine hyperstimulation during labor on fetal oxygen status and fetal heart rate patterns. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 199: 34.e1-5.
19 Marsdal KE, Sørbye IK, Gaudernack LC, Lukasse M. A comparison of misoprostol vaginal insert and misoprostol vaginal tablets for induction of labor in nulliparous women: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2018; 18: 11.
20 Mayer RB, Oppelt P, Shebl O, Pömer J, Allerstorfer C, Weiss C. Initial clinical experience with a misoprostol vaginal insert in comparison with a dinoprostone insert for inducing labor. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2016; 200: 89–93.
21 Schmidt M, Neophytou M, Hars O, Freudenberg J, Kühnert M. Clinical experience with misoprostol vaginal insert for induction of labor: a prospective clinical observational study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2018; published online Oct 29. DOI:10.1007/s00404-018-4942-y.
22 Frey HA, Tuuli MG, Roehl KA, Odibo AO, Macones GA, Cahill AG. Can contraction patterns predict neonatal outcomes? J Matern-Fetal Neonatal Med 2014; 27: 1422–7.
23 Steer PJ. Standards in fetal monitoring--practical requirements for uterine activity measurement and recording. BJOGl 1993; 100 Suppl 9: 32–6.
24 Bakker JJH, Janssen PF, van Halem K, et al. Internal versus external tocodynamometry during induced or augmented labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; : CD006947.
25 Bakker PCAM, Van Rijswijk S, Van Rijsiwijk S, van Geijn HP. Uterine activity monitoring during labor. J Perinat Med 2007; 35: 468–77.
26 Vlemminx MWC, Thijssen KMJ, Bajlekov GI, Dieleman JP, Van Der Hout-Van Der Jagt MB, Oei SG. Electrohysterography for uterine monitoring during term labour compared to external tocodynamometry and intra-uterine pressure catheter. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2017; 215: 197–205.
27 Euliano T, Skowronski M, Marossero D, Shuster J, Edwards R. Prediction of intrauterine pressure waveform from transabdominal electrohysterography. J Matern-Fetal Neonatal Med 2006; 19: 811–6.
28 Alberola-Rubio J, Garcia-Casado J, Prats-Boluda G, et al. Prediction of labor onset type: Spontaneous vs induced; role of electrohysterography? Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2017; 144: 127–33.
29 Garcia-Casado J, Ye-Lin Y, Prats-Boluda G, Mas-Cabo J, Alberola-Rubio J, Perales A. Electrohysterography in the diagnosis of preterm birth: a review. Physiol Meas 2018; 39: 02TR01.
30 Benalcazar-Parra C, Ye-Lin Y, Garcia-Casado J, et al. Electrohysterographic characterization of the uterine myoelectrical response to labor induction drugs. Med Eng Phys 2018; 56: 27–35.