ChorioamnionitisNCT05603624
Effect of Sterile Versus Clean Gloves Intrapartum and Postpartum Infections at Term
A study testing Cervical examination to assess labor in people with Chorioamnionitis and Intrauterine Infection, run by Eastern Virginia Medical School at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
This prospective randomized controlled study examines whether the type of glove used (sterile vs clean) for cervical examination to assess progression in labor impacts the rates of intrapartum and/or postpartum infection in patients during labor or induction of labor at term. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 50 years, women onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Chorioamnionitis, Intrauterine Infection, Postpartum Endometritis
- What is being tested?
- Cervical examination to assess labor
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 163 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 2 Sep 2021to 1 Sep 2022
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 50 years
- Women only
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Between 18 and 50 years old
- Term pregnancy (37w0d to 41w6d gestational age)
- Amniotic membranes were intact on admission
- Patient presenting in spontaneous labor or were to undergo induction of labor
- Patient attempting for a vaginal delivery initially, even if the final delivery method was by cesarean section
Who cannot join
- Preterm pregnancy (before 37w0d gestational age)
- Postdate pregnancy (after 41w6d gestational age)
- Ruptured membranes or premature rupture of membranes on admission
- Patient being evaluated for preterm labor
- Patient has diagnosis of chorioamnionitis or any intrauterine infection
- Patient has an extrauterine infection that would compromise the diagnosis of intrauterine infection (e.g., COVID, upper respiratory infections, urinary tract infections, cellulitis, appendicitis, etc.)
Show all 10Show fewer
- Patient experiencing an immunocompromised state (e.g., human immunodeficiency virus, congenital syndromes, transplant recipient, or immunosuppressant use)
- Patient with uncertainty of their gestational age and/or no prenatal care
- Patient with an intrauterine fetal demise
- Patient requesting a termination of the pregnancy
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Eastern Virginia Medical School
Norfolk, Virginia, 23507
About this study
This prospective randomized controlled study examines whether the type of glove used (sterile vs clean) for cervical examination to assess progression in labor impacts the rates of intrapartum and/or postpartum infection in patients during labor or induction of labor at term.
Read the detailed description
Introduction The vaginal microbiota consists of a wide array of possible bacteria including species Ureaplasma, Listeria, Lactobacillus, Atopbium, Megasphaera, Leptotrichia, Peptostreptococcus, Prevotella, Diphtheria, Escherichia, Klebsiella, Enterobacter, Proteus, Pseudomonas, Gardnerella, Staphylococcus, and Streptococcus.1,2 However, the uterus is thought to be much less diverse in flora and possibly sterile, especially in the setting of pregnancy.3 Thickening of the cervical mucus functions as a buffer to prevent the polymicrobial vaginal bacteria from ascending into the uterus in pregnancy. Intraamniotic or intrauterine infections (IAI), also known as chorioamnionitis, are thought to occur most frequently from an ascending infection from the lower genital tract into the uterine cavity.4 IAI usually warrants immediate delivery and impacts 5 - 12% of term pregnancies, with the most commonly identified pathogenic species being Ureaplasma.5-7 IAI carries significant neonatal morbidity including increased risk for neonatal pneumonia, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, poor neonatal growth, dermatitis, necrotizing enterocolitis, retinopathy of prematurity, cerebral palsy, meningitis, sepsis, and death.4,7 When performing cervical examinations during labor, providers in the United States commonly use a sterile glove to examine dilation and effacement of the cervix and station of the fetal head, although there are no data currently to support that this practice reduces rates of infection. Even though the uterus could be sterile in normal pregnancies, the provider performing the cervical examination must traverse the milieu of diverse vaginal bacteria in order to reach the cervix to perform the exam, introducing vaginal microbiota into the uterus. Despite this, it is unclear if the number of cervical examinations impacts risk of infection, especially before rupture of membranes (ROM).8,9 Common risk factors for IAI acknowledged by the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) include excessive number of cervical examinations (especially after rupture of membranes), cervical insufficiency, internal fetal heart rate or uterine contraction monitors, intracervical balloon catheters for induction of labor, urogenital pathogens (sexually transmitted infections (STI), group B streptococcus (GBS) colonization, bacterial vaginosis), nulliparity, alcohol and tobacco use in pregnancy, and meconium-stained amniotic fluid.4 Nevertheless, some of these factors are also associated with longer duration of labor, rupture of membranes, and more cervical examinations, so they may not be independently associated with IAI.8,10 The theory behind IAI, assuming there are no other sources of maternal infection present elsewhere that could be introduced into the uterus or passed through the placenta, is that an infection ascends from the vagina into the intrauterine or intraamniotic space to cause the infection. We hypothesize that the type of glove used for examination should not impact rates of intrapartum or postpartum infection since the glove, whether originally sterile or not, would have to pass through the unsterile vagina to reach the cervix to perform the cervical examination. This prospective randomized controlled study examines whether the type of glove used (sterile vs clean) impacts the rates of IAI in patients receiving cervical examinations during labor or induction of labor at term.
Methods Patients meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria below provided written informed consent to participate in the study after admission to labor and delivery at the single institution tertiary care referral center for this study. Any cervical examinations performed prior to the patient being consented to participate in the study were not included, such as if performed in the office or in the triage area, prior to admission.
This study followed the format of a randomized prospective cohort study where eligible and consented participants were randomized to receive all cervical examinations with sterile powder-free polyvinyl chloride exam gloves (current routine practice, control group) or clean powder-free nitrile exam gloves (nonsterile, experimental group). Neither the clinical providers performing the exam nor the participants were blinded to the glove type used, however, the researchers did not know which glove type was used while completing the retrospective data collection and analysis. All other obstetrical care provided to the participants was per ACOG guidelines and the only changes made to their care was the type of glove used for this study.
Interested participants were eligible to participate if their pregnancy was at term (37w0d to 41w6d gestational age), if their amniotic membranes were intact on admission, if they were presenting in spontaneous labor or were to undergo induction of labor, and if they were attempting for a vaginal delivery initially, even if the final delivery method was by cesarean section. Participants were excluded if they were preterm (before 37w0d gestational age), postdates (after 41w6d gestational age), with ruptured membranes or premature rupture of membranes on admission, in preterm labor, with the diagnosis of chorioamnionitis or any intrauterine infection, with extrauterine infection that would compromise the diagnosis of intrauterine infection (e.g., COVID, upper respiratory infections, urinary tract infections, cellulitis, appendicitis, etc.), experiencing an immunocompromised state (e.g., human immunodeficiency virus, congenital syndromes, transplant recipient, or immunosuppressant use), with uncertainty of their gestational age or no prenatal care, with an intrauterine fetal demise, or requesting a termination of the pregnancy. Twin or multigestational pregnancies were not excluded, however, only singleton pregnancies consented to participate in the study.
The primary outcome of the study was the proportion of participants in each glove group who experienced intraamniotic or intrauterine infection or chorioamnionitis or intrapartum infection, these terms are used interchangeably for the purposes of this study. The diagnostic criteria for intraamniotic/intrauterine infection followed the ACOG committee opinion 7124 on the topic, listed below for reference:
Patients must have fever >39.0*C (102.2F) ONE TIME without need to recheck temperature in the presence of no other identifiable source of fever OR
Fever of 38.0 - 38.9*C (100.4 - 102.02F) on two or more measurements that are at least 30 minutes apart without another clear source PLUS one or more of the following:
- Baseline fetal heart rate >160 beats/min for ≥10 minutes, excluding accelerations, decelerations, and periods of marked variability.
- Maternal white cell (WBC) count >15,000/mm^3 in the absence of corticosteroids and ideally showing a left shift (bandemia).
- Purulent-appearing fluid coming from the cervical os visualized by speculum examination.
The study's secondary outcomes and other data recorded included:
Rates of endometritis, maternal age, gravida, parity, induction of labor (IOL) method (foley balloon, cook catheter or cervical ripening balloon, Cytotec (misoprostol), Pitocin (oxytocin), Dilapan, Cervidil), artificial or spontaneous rupture of membrane time (AROM and SROM respectively), time of first cervical exam, number of documented cervical exams, delivery time, delivery method (cesarean section vs vaginal delivery), operative delivery (forceps or vacuum), postpartum hemorrhage (qualitative blood loss > 1000 mL), GBS colonization, gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T1DM or T2DM, respectively), genitourinary infections (urinary tract infections (UTI), pyelonephritis, gonorrhea (Gc), chlamydia (Ch), trichomonas (Tr), or pelvic inflammatory disease), tobacco/alcohol/drug use in pregnancy, meconium stained fluid, intrauterine pressure catheter (IUPC) use, fetal scalp electrode (FSE) use, epidural use, length of IOL (first cervical exam to delivery time), starting dilation, initial white blood cell (WBC) level on presentation, initial maternal temperature, highest maternal temperature, initial maternal heart rate (HR), highest maternal HR, and fetal tachycardia, if present and noted in the maternal chart.
Participants were considered GBS colonized if they had a positive rectovaginal culture by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) during routine prenatal care. All patients with a GBS positive status received antibiotics per ACOG recommendations. GBS negative or participants that did not have a GBS rectovaginal culture were not considered GBS colonized in this study to help distinguish those participants receiving antibiotics in labor.
Statistical analysis and sample size:
Given that the estimated rates of IAI in term pregnancy is estimated to be between 5-12%, weekly analysis was performed to ensure that interim rates of infection did not exceed 20%, which is double the median expected rate at term and would warrant discontinuation of the study. Data was collected in a deidentified manner from chart review and input into a REDCap database for analysis. The study was approved by the Eastern Virginia Medical School Institutional Review Board under IRB 21-09-FB-0206.
Descriptive statistics were used to describe the demographic and baseline characteristics of each cohort. Independent group comparisons were used to assure that the randomization resulted in equal groups at baseline. Continuous variables were compared with a two-sample independent group t test for normally distributed data or by Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test for non-normally distributed continuous variables. For categorical variables, the two groups were compared by Chi square test or Fisher exact test based on expected cell size.
- Being tested
- Cervical examination to assess labor
- Keywords
- Sterile glove, Clean glove, Glove type, Intraamniotic infection, Cervical examination, Sterile vaginal examination, Intrapartum infection, Postpartum infection
- Medical subject headings
- Chorioamnionitis, Puerperal Infection
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Cervical examination to assess laborProcedure or surgery
Patients were randomized to receive cervical examinations to assess progression in labor with either sterile or clean gloves.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Sterile glove | Active comparator | Sterile glove is usually the standard of care Receives: Procedure: Cervical examination to assess labor |
| Clean glove | Experimental | Clean glove is usually not used or in the event of an emergency or lack of access to sterile gloves in the United States. Receives: Procedure: Cervical examination to assess labor |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Chorioamnionitis or intraamniotic or intrauterine infection
As defined by ACOG committee opinion 712
Measured: Through study completion, usually withing 72 hours after admission to labor and delivery
Secondary outcomes (1)
Postpartum endometritis
As defined by ACOG committee opinion 712
Measured: Through study completion, usually withing 72 hours after admission to labor and delivery
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted2 Nov 2022
- Study start2 Sep 2021
- Primary completion1 Sep 2022
- Study completion1 Sep 2022
Why it stopped: Futility due to sample size needed to prove superiority and lack of difference in outcomes between intervention and control group.
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (9)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for ChorioamnionitisStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Eligible and consented participants were randomized to receive all cervical examinations with sterile powder-free polyvinyl chloride exam gloves (current routine practice, control group) or clean powder-free nitrile exam gloves (nonsterile, experimental group). Neither the clinical providers performing the exam nor the participants were blinded to the glove type used, however, the researchers did not know which glove type was used while completing the retrospective data collection and analysis. All other obstetrical care provided to the participants was per ACOG guidelines and the only changes made to their care was the type of glove used for this study.
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 163 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Eastern Virginia Medical School
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Stacy Slat, MD, Principal investigator, Eastern Virginia Medical School
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05603624
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 21-09-FB-0206
- Status last verified
- Aug 2023
- First submitted
- 28 Oct 2022
- Last updated
- 25 Aug 2023
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: If contacted, can share deidentified participant data.
Publications
Lamont RF, Sobel JD, Akins RA, Hassan SS, Chaiworapongsa T, Kusanovic JP, Romero R. The vaginal microbiome: new information about genital tract flora using molecular based techniques. BJOG. 2011 Apr;118(5):533-49. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02840.x. Epub 2011 Jan 20.
PubMed 21251190Larsen B, Monif GR. Understanding the bacterial flora of the female genital tract. Clin Infect Dis. 2001 Feb 15;32(4):e69-77. doi: 10.1086/318710. Epub 2001 Feb 9.
PubMed 11181139Perez-Munoz ME, Arrieta MC, Ramer-Tait AE, Walter J. A critical assessment of the "sterile womb" and "in utero colonization" hypotheses: implications for research on the pioneer infant microbiome. Microbiome. 2017 Apr 28;5(1):48. doi: 10.1186/s40168-017-0268-4.
PubMed 28454555Committee Opinion No. 712: Intrapartum Management of Intraamniotic Infection. Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Aug;130(2):e95-e101. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002236.
PubMed 28742677Rouse DJ, Landon M, Leveno KJ, Leindecker S, Varner MW, Caritis SN, O'Sullivan MJ, Wapner RJ, Meis PJ, Miodovnik M, Sorokin Y, Moawad AH, Mabie W, Conway D, Gabbe SG, Spong CY; National Institute of Child Health And Human Development, Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. The Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units cesarean registry: chorioamnionitis at term and its duration-relationship to outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Jul;191(1):211-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.03.003.
PubMed 15295368Sweeney EL, Dando SJ, Kallapur SG, Knox CL. The Human Ureaplasma Species as Causative Agents of Chorioamnionitis. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2016 Dec 14;30(1):349-379. doi: 10.1128/CMR.00091-16. Print 2017 Jan.
PubMed 27974410Cahill AG, Duffy CR, Odibo AO, Roehl KA, Zhao Q, Macones GA. Number of cervical examinations and risk of intrapartum maternal fever. Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Jun;119(6):1096-101. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e318256ce3f.
PubMed 22617572Gluck O, Mizrachi Y, Ganer Herman H, Bar J, Kovo M, Weiner E. The correlation between the number of vaginal examinations during active labor and febrile morbidity, a retrospective cohort study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020 Apr 25;20(1):246. doi: 10.1186/s12884-020-02925-9.
PubMed 32334543Morshedi B, Strohm S, James H, Springer C, Gould L, Thurman A, Slat S. Effect of sterile vs clean gloves for cervical checks in labor on maternal infection at term: a randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2023 Jun;5(6):100931. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.100931. Epub 2023 Mar 24.
PubMed 36965695
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 25 Aug 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effect of Sterile Versus Clean Gloves Intrapartum and Postpartum Infections at Term
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05603624
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 21-09-FB-0206
- Keywords
- Sterile glove, Clean glove, Glove type, Intraamniotic infection, Cervical examination, Sterile vaginal examination, Intrapartum infection, Postpartum infection
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- TerminatedReason stopped: Futility due to sample size needed to prove superiority and lack of difference in outcomes between intervention and control group.
- Enrolment
- 163 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Eastern Virginia Medical SchoolUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 2 Sep 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Sep 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Sep 2022 (actual)
- First posted
- 2 Nov 2022 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This prospective randomized controlled study examines whether the type of glove used (sterile vs clean) for cervical examination to assess progression in labor impacts the rates of intrapartum and/or postpartum infection in patients during labor or induction of labor at term.
Detailed description
Introduction The vaginal microbiota consists of a wide array of possible bacteria including species Ureaplasma, Listeria, Lactobacillus, Atopbium, Megasphaera, Leptotrichia, Peptostreptococcus, Prevotella, Diphtheria, Escherichia, Klebsiella, Enterobacter, Proteus, Pseudomonas, Gardnerella, Staphylococcus, and Streptococcus.1,2 However, the uterus is thought to be much less diverse in flora and possibly sterile, especially in the setting of pregnancy.3 Thickening of the cervical mucus functions as a buffer to prevent the polymicrobial vaginal bacteria from ascending into the uterus in pregnancy. Intraamniotic or intrauterine infections (IAI), also known as chorioamnionitis, are thought to occur most frequently from an ascending infection from the lower genital tract into the uterine cavity.4 IAI usually warrants immediate delivery and impacts 5 - 12% of term pregnancies, with the most commonly identified pathogenic species being Ureaplasma.5-7 IAI carries significant neonatal morbidity including increased risk for neonatal pneumonia, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, poor neonatal growth, dermatitis, necrotizing enterocolitis, retinopathy of prematurity, cerebral palsy, meningitis, sepsis, and death.4,7 When performing cervical examinations during labor, providers in the United States commonly use a sterile glove to examine dilation and effacement of the cervix and station of the fetal head, although there are no data currently to support that this practice reduces rates of infection. Even though the uterus could be sterile in normal pregnancies, the provider performing the cervical examination must traverse the milieu of diverse vaginal bacteria in order to reach the cervix to perform the exam, introducing vaginal microbiota into the uterus. Despite this, it is unclear if the number of cervical examinations impacts risk of infection, especially before rupture of membranes (ROM).8,9 Common risk factors for IAI acknowledged by the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology (ACOG) include excessive number of cervical examinations (especially after rupture of membranes), cervical insufficiency, internal fetal heart rate or uterine contraction monitors, intracervical balloon catheters for induction of labor, urogenital pathogens (sexually transmitted infections (STI), group B streptococcus (GBS) colonization, bacterial vaginosis), nulliparity, alcohol and tobacco use in pregnancy, and meconium-stained amniotic fluid.4 Nevertheless, some of these factors are also associated with longer duration of labor, rupture of membranes, and more cervical examinations, so they may not be independently associated with IAI.8,10 The theory behind IAI, assuming there are no other sources of maternal infection present elsewhere that could be introduced into the uterus or passed through the placenta, is that an infection ascends from the vagina into the intrauterine or intraamniotic space to cause the infection. We hypothesize that the type of glove used for examination should not impact rates of intrapartum or postpartum infection since the glove, whether originally sterile or not, would have to pass through the unsterile vagina to reach the cervix to perform the cervical examination. This prospective randomized controlled study examines whether the type of glove used (sterile vs clean) impacts the rates of IAI in patients receiving cervical examinations during labor or induction of labor at term.
Methods Patients meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria below provided written informed consent to participate in the study after admission to labor and delivery at the single institution tertiary care referral center for this study. Any cervical examinations performed prior to the patient being consented to participate in the study were not included, such as if performed in the office or in the triage area, prior to admission.
This study followed the format of a randomized prospective cohort study where eligible and consented participants were randomized to receive all cervical examinations with sterile powder-free polyvinyl chloride exam gloves (current routine practice, control group) or clean powder-free nitrile exam gloves (nonsterile, experimental group). Neither the clinical providers performing the exam nor the participants were blinded to the glove type used, however, the researchers did not know which glove type was used while completing the retrospective data collection and analysis. All other obstetrical care provided to the participants was per ACOG guidelines and the only changes made to their care was the type of glove used for this study.
Interested participants were eligible to participate if their pregnancy was at term (37w0d to 41w6d gestational age), if their amniotic membranes were intact on admission, if they were presenting in spontaneous labor or were to undergo induction of labor, and if they were attempting for a vaginal delivery initially, even if the final delivery method was by cesarean section. Participants were excluded if they were preterm (before 37w0d gestational age), postdates (after 41w6d gestational age), with ruptured membranes or premature rupture of membranes on admission, in preterm labor, with the diagnosis of chorioamnionitis or any intrauterine infection, with extrauterine infection that would compromise the diagnosis of intrauterine infection (e.g., COVID, upper respiratory infections, urinary tract infections, cellulitis, appendicitis, etc.), experiencing an immunocompromised state (e.g., human immunodeficiency virus, congenital syndromes, transplant recipient, or immunosuppressant use), with uncertainty of their gestational age or no prenatal care, with an intrauterine fetal demise, or requesting a termination of the pregnancy. Twin or multigestational pregnancies were not excluded, however, only singleton pregnancies consented to participate in the study.
The primary outcome of the study was the proportion of participants in each glove group who experienced intraamniotic or intrauterine infection or chorioamnionitis or intrapartum infection, these terms are used interchangeably for the purposes of this study. The diagnostic criteria for intraamniotic/intrauterine infection followed the ACOG committee opinion 7124 on the topic, listed below for reference:
Patients must have fever >39.0*C (102.2F) ONE TIME without need to recheck temperature in the presence of no other identifiable source of fever OR
Fever of 38.0 - 38.9*C (100.4 - 102.02F) on two or more measurements that are at least 30 minutes apart without another clear source PLUS one or more of the following:
- Baseline fetal heart rate >160 beats/min for ≥10 minutes, excluding accelerations, decelerations, and periods of marked variability.
- Maternal white cell (WBC) count >15,000/mm^3 in the absence of corticosteroids and ideally showing a left shift (bandemia).
- Purulent-appearing fluid coming from the cervical os visualized by speculum examination.
The study's secondary outcomes and other data recorded included:
Rates of endometritis, maternal age, gravida, parity, induction of labor (IOL) method (foley balloon, cook catheter or cervical ripening balloon, Cytotec (misoprostol), Pitocin (oxytocin), Dilapan, Cervidil), artificial or spontaneous rupture of membrane time (AROM and SROM respectively), time of first cervical exam, number of documented cervical exams, delivery time, delivery method (cesarean section vs vaginal delivery), operative delivery (forceps or vacuum), postpartum hemorrhage (qualitative blood loss > 1000 mL), GBS colonization, gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T1DM or T2DM, respectively), genitourinary infections (urinary tract infections (UTI), pyelonephritis, gonorrhea (Gc), chlamydia (Ch), trichomonas (Tr), or pelvic inflammatory disease), tobacco/alcohol/drug use in pregnancy, meconium stained fluid, intrauterine pressure catheter (IUPC) use, fetal scalp electrode (FSE) use, epidural use, length of IOL (first cervical exam to delivery time), starting dilation, initial white blood cell (WBC) level on presentation, initial maternal temperature, highest maternal temperature, initial maternal heart rate (HR), highest maternal HR, and fetal tachycardia, if present and noted in the maternal chart.
Participants were considered GBS colonized if they had a positive rectovaginal culture by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) during routine prenatal care. All patients with a GBS positive status received antibiotics per ACOG recommendations. GBS negative or participants that did not have a GBS rectovaginal culture were not considered GBS colonized in this study to help distinguish those participants receiving antibiotics in labor.
Statistical analysis and sample size:
Given that the estimated rates of IAI in term pregnancy is estimated to be between 5-12%, weekly analysis was performed to ensure that interim rates of infection did not exceed 20%, which is double the median expected rate at term and would warrant discontinuation of the study. Data was collected in a deidentified manner from chart review and input into a REDCap database for analysis. The study was approved by the Eastern Virginia Medical School Institutional Review Board under IRB 21-09-FB-0206.
Descriptive statistics were used to describe the demographic and baseline characteristics of each cohort. Independent group comparisons were used to assure that the randomization resulted in equal groups at baseline. Continuous variables were compared with a two-sample independent group t test for normally distributed data or by Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test for non-normally distributed continuous variables. For categorical variables, the two groups were compared by Chi square test or Fisher exact test based on expected cell size.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Eligible and consented participants were randomized to receive all cervical examinations with sterile powder-free polyvinyl chloride exam gloves (current routine practice, control group) or clean powder-free nitrile exam gloves (nonsterile, experimental group). Neither the clinical providers performing the exam nor the participants were blinded to the glove type used, however, the researchers did not know which glove type was used while completing the retrospective data collection and analysis. All other obstetrical care provided to the participants was per ACOG guidelines and the only changes made to their care was the type of glove used for this study.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Sterile glove | Active comparator | Procedure: Cervical examination to assess laborSterile glove is usually the standard of care |
| Clean glove | Experimental | Procedure: Cervical examination to assess laborClean glove is usually not used or in the event of an emergency or lack of access to sterile gloves in the United States. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 50 years
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Between 18 and 50 years old
- Term pregnancy (37w0d to 41w6d gestational age)
- Amniotic membranes were intact on admission
- Patient presenting in spontaneous labor or were to undergo induction of labor
- Patient attempting for a vaginal delivery initially, even if the final delivery method was by cesarean section
Key exclusion criteria (10 listed)
- Preterm pregnancy (before 37w0d gestational age)
- Postdate pregnancy (after 41w6d gestational age)
- Ruptured membranes or premature rupture of membranes on admission
- Patient being evaluated for preterm labor
- Patient has diagnosis of chorioamnionitis or any intrauterine infection
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Cervical examination to assess laborPatients were randomized to receive cervical examinations to assess progression in labor with either sterile or clean gloves. | Procedure or surgery | Clean glove, Sterile glove |
Primary outcome
Chorioamnionitis or intraamniotic or intrauterine infection
Time frame: Through study completion, usually withing 72 hours after admission to labor and delivery
As defined by ACOG committee opinion 712
1 secondary outcome
Postpartum endometritis
Time frame: Through study completion, usually withing 72 hours after admission to labor and delivery
Results and safety
The study was stopped early (reason given: Futility due to sample size needed to prove superiority and lack of difference in outcomes between intervention and control group.). Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 25 Aug 2023.
- Results publication: PubMed 21251190Lamont RF, Sobel JD, Akins RA, Hassan SS, Chaiworapongsa T, Kusanovic JP, Romero R. The vaginal microbiome: new information about genital tract flora using molecular based techniques. BJOG. 2011 Apr;118(5):533-49. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02840.x. Epub 2011 Jan 20.
- Results publication: PubMed 11181139Larsen B, Monif GR. Understanding the bacterial flora of the female genital tract. Clin Infect Dis. 2001 Feb 15;32(4):e69-77. doi: 10.1086/318710. Epub 2001 Feb 9.
- Results publication: PubMed 28454555Perez-Munoz ME, Arrieta MC, Ramer-Tait AE, Walter J. A critical assessment of the "sterile womb" and "in utero colonization" hypotheses: implications for research on the pioneer infant microbiome. Microbiome. 2017 Apr 28;5(1):48. doi: 10.1186/s40168-017-0268-4.
- Results publication: PubMed 28742677Committee Opinion No. 712: Intrapartum Management of Intraamniotic Infection. Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Aug;130(2):e95-e101. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002236.
- Results publication: PubMed 15295368Rouse DJ, Landon M, Leveno KJ, Leindecker S, Varner MW, Caritis SN, O'Sullivan MJ, Wapner RJ, Meis PJ, Miodovnik M, Sorokin Y, Moawad AH, Mabie W, Conway D, Gabbe SG, Spong CY; National Institute of Child Health And Human Development, Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network. The Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units cesarean registry: chorioamnionitis at term and its duration-relationship to outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Jul;191(1):211-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2004.03.003.
- Results publication: PubMed 27974410Sweeney EL, Dando SJ, Kallapur SG, Knox CL. The Human Ureaplasma Species as Causative Agents of Chorioamnionitis. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2016 Dec 14;30(1):349-379. doi: 10.1128/CMR.00091-16. Print 2017 Jan.
- Results publication: PubMed 22617572Cahill AG, Duffy CR, Odibo AO, Roehl KA, Zhao Q, Macones GA. Number of cervical examinations and risk of intrapartum maternal fever. Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Jun;119(6):1096-101. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e318256ce3f.
- Results publication: PubMed 32334543Gluck O, Mizrachi Y, Ganer Herman H, Bar J, Kovo M, Weiner E. The correlation between the number of vaginal examinations during active labor and febrile morbidity, a retrospective cohort study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020 Apr 25;20(1):246. doi: 10.1186/s12884-020-02925-9.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 36965695Morshedi B, Strohm S, James H, Springer C, Gould L, Thurman A, Slat S. Effect of sterile vs clean gloves for cervical checks in labor on maternal infection at term: a randomized trial. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2023 Jun;5(6):100931. doi: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2023.100931. Epub 2023 Mar 24.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. If contacted, can share deidentified participant data.
Related trials for Chorioamnionitis
Recruiting
Amnioinfusion for Chorioamnionitis: Targeting Neonatal Brain Injury Biomarkers
Chorioamnionitis Affecting Fetus or Newborn, Amnioinfusion
Recruiting
Comparing Infectious Morbidity Among Women With Meconium-stained Amniotic Fluid at Term, Between Those Treated With Prophylactic Antibiotics Zinacef vs. Placebo
Meconium-stained Amniotic Fluid, Chorioamnionitis
Active, not recruitingObservational study
IL-6 and Lactates in Cord Blood and Neonatal Outcomes
Fetal Infection, Fetal Inflammatory Response Syndrome
Enrolling by invitation
Planned Early Induction of Labor vs Expectant Management for PROM
Premature Rupture of Membranes (PROM)
Active, not recruitingObservational study
Association Between Neuraxial Labor Analgesia and Maternal and Neonatal Infectious Outcomes
Intrapartum Maternal Fever, Clinical Chorioamnionitis
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Stacy Slat, MD principal investigator
Eastern Virginia Medical School
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Cervical examination to assess labor in people with Chorioamnionitis and Intrauterine Infection, run by Eastern Virginia Medical School at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 10 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: stopped early, as of the sponsor's last update on 25 Aug 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study was stopped early (reason given: Futility due to sample size needed to prove superiority and lack of difference in outcomes between intervention and control group.). Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Chorioamnionitis or intraamniotic or intrauterine infection (time frame: Through study completion, usually withing 72 hours after admission to labor and delivery). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT05603624, which also lists 9 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 25 Aug 2023.