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.