Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background: Scheduled intermittent Foley balloon tugging (30 seconds of forceful traction every 3 hours during a planned 12-hour placement) has been proposed to shorten induction of labor. We synthesized the randomized evidence on this question. Methods: We searched MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Scopus from inception to June 2026 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing 3-hourly Foley tugging with standard passive care. Primary outcomes were induction-to-birth interval and cesarean delivery. Risk of bias was assessed with RoB 2 and certainty of evidence with GRADE. Mean differences (MD) and risk ratios (RR) were pooled using DerSimonian–Laird random-effects models, with fixed-effect, Hartung–Knapp, leave-one-out, and substituted-estimate sensitivity analyses. The protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework (10.17605/OSF.IO/S37DZ). Results: Three RCTs including 610 women (305 per arm) were eligible. Tugging did not significantly shorten the induction-to-birth interval (MD −1.36 hours, 95% CI −3.21 to 0.50, I² = 0%) or reduce cesarean delivery (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.14, I² = 37%). Additional cervical ripening (two trials, 484 women) did not differ significantly (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.11). Maternal satisfaction and neonatal acidemia did not differ significantly between arms. Findings were unchanged in all sensitivity analyses. Certainty of evidence was moderate for induction-to-birth interval and low for the remaining outcomes. Conclusion: Current randomized evidence does not show that scheduled 3-hourly Foley tugging shortens induction or lowers cesarean delivery, although it appears safe and acceptable and a modest benefit is not excluded. Routine adoption cannot be recommended, larger multicenter trials are needed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Habtamu Fekadu Andeta (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: