Myth: VBACs should never be induced

by | May 27, 2012 | Birth myths, Inductions, Large/macrosomic babies, Planning your vbac, Uterine Rupture, VBAC | 18 comments

Note: When I refer to a spontaneous labor, I mean a non-induced/augmented labor. Also, given that the risk of rupture increases with induction, a hospital is the best location for an induction.

Many of the comments left at the Forced Cesarean mom story questioned the safety of inducing a VBAC mom. Many people believe that is it excessively dangerous and that VBACs should never been induced or augmented. This is just not the case and is one of the five myths I debunk in my free uterine rupture report.

Spontaneous labor is always preferable to induced or augmented labor. But there are medical conditions that can necessitate the immediate birth of a baby. It’s nice for those women for whom vaginal birth is still an option to have a choice: gentle induction/ augmentation or repeat cesarean. Of course, reviewing the risks and benefits of available options, including doing nothing, is essential. Some women might be more comfortable scheduling a cesarean whereas others might want to give a gentle Pitocin and/or Foley catheter induction a go.

ACOG’s stance on inducing VBACs

The latest 2010 VBAC Practice Bulletin No. 115 produced by the American Congress of Obstetricians & Gynecologists (ACOG) asserts:

Induction of labor for maternal or fetal indications remains an option in women undergoing TOLAC [trial of labor after cesarean]… However, the potential increased risk of uterine rupture associated with any induction, and the potential decreased possibility of achieving VBAC, should be discussed… Misoprostol [Cytotec] should not be used for third trimester cervical ripening or labor induction in patients who have had a cesarean delivery or major uterine surgery.

Stuart Fischbein MD, a vaginal breech/twins and VBAC supportive Southern California OB, recently shared this on my Facebook page,

According to ACOG, prior low transverse c/section is not a contraindication to induction (other than the use of Misoprostol [Cytotec]) so a Foley balloon or Pitocin may be used safely in these women. The problem arises when a practitioner does not believe in doing inductions on women with prior c/section. Despite the evidence and the ACOG clinical guideline the reality is that many doctors will just not want to deal with it.

“Many doctors will just not want to deal with it” for a variety of reasons including experiencing a recent uterine rupture or lawsuit and pressure from hospital administrators or other OBs in their practice. It’s good to know from the beginning if your care provider is open to a gentle VBAC induction and under what conditions they would recommend induction. (See below for the Mayo Clinic’s reasons for induction.) This is why I suggest asking care providers when you first meet with them: “Under what circumstances would you induce a VBAC?” and “What induction methods do you use?”

Here you can create the content that will be used within the module.

Medical reasons for induction

While many women are induced for non-medical reasons, such as being pregnant for 40 weeks and one day, there are many medical conditions where induction is a reasonable option.  ACOG’s recommendations on induction lists the following reasons:

  • Abruptio placentae [placental abruption]
  • Chorioamnionitis [uterine infection]
  • Fetal demise [baby has passed away]
  • Gestational hypertension
  • Preeclampsia, eclampsia
  • Premature rupture of membranes
  • Postterm pregnancy [after 42 weeks]
  • Maternal medical conditions (eg, diabetes, mellitus, renal [kidney] disease, chronic pulmonary disease, chronic hypertension, antiphospholipid syndrome)
  • Fetal compromise (eg, severe fetal growth restriction, isoimmunization, oligohydramnios)
Big babies & going overdue

ACOG’s latest VBAC Pratice Bulletin No. 115 states that going over 40 weeks or suspecting a “big baby” should not prevent a woman from planning a VBAC. I suggest asking your care provider at your first appointment about what they would recommend doing if you go past 40 weeks, past 42 weeks, or if they believe your baby is large. They may suggest a cesarean, a gentle induction, or they be open to waiting for spontaneous labor. Then you decide how you feel about their answer. If you decide that their answer is not a good fit for you, you can weigh that against the responses of other VBAC supportive care providers in your area.

Uterine rupture rates in induced/augmented labors

There are two primary factors when looking at uterine rupture during an induction: the drug and the dose. Keep in mind that while the risk of rupture generally increases as the dosage increases, two women can respond very differently to the same dose of the same drug. According to JHP Pharmaceuticals, LLC, the manufacturer of Pitocin,

Oxytocin has specific receptors in the myometrium and the receptor concentration increases greatly during pregnancy, reaching a maximum in early labor at term. The response to a given dose of oxytocin is very individualized and depends on the sensitivity of the uterus, which is determined by the oxytocin receptor concentration.

Additionally, they assert that Pitocin should not be used for induction without medical indication:

Elective induction of labor is defined as the initiation of labor in a pregnant individual who has no medical indications for induction. Since the available data are inadequate to evaluate the benefits-to-risks considerations, Pitocin is not indicated for elective induction of labor.

Many women point to the fact that the Pitocin drug insert states, “Except in unusual circumstances, oxytocin should not be administered in the following conditions” and then lists “previous major surgery on the cervix or uterus including cesarean section.” However, a prior cesarean is not listed under contraindications and the drug insert is clear:

The decision [to use Pitocin in a woman with a prior cesarean] can be made only by carefully weighing the potential benefits which oxytocin can provide in a given case against rare but definite potential for the drug to produce hypertonicity or tetanic spasm.

The elevated risk of rupture due to induction has been documented in several studies. Landon (2004) found that spontaneous labors had a 0.4% rate of rupture. That increased 2.5 times for induced labors (1.0%) and 2.25 times for augmented labors (0.9%).

Landon further broke out rupture rates by type of induction:

  • 1.4% (N = 13) with any prostaglandins (with or without oxytocin)
  • 0% with prostaglandins alone
  • 0.9% (n = 15) with no prostaglandins (includes mechanical dilation with a foley catheter with or without oxytocin), and
  • 1.1% (N = 20) with oxytocin alone.

Overall, they found 0.7% of women experienced an uterine rupture with an additional 0.7% experiencing a dehiscence.

Landon (2004) did a great job in providing rates of rupture per drug, but we don’t know the dose used in the induced/ augmented labors that ruptured versus those that didn’t rupture.

ACOG quotes a couple studies in their 2010 VBAC Practice Bulletin (emphasis mine):

One study of 20,095 women who had undergone prior cesarean delivery (81) found a rate of uterine rupture of 0.52% for spontaneous labor, 0.77% for labor induced without prostaglandins, and 2.24% for prostaglandin induced labor. This study was limited by reliance on the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision coding for diagnosis of uterine rupture and the inability to determine whether prostaglandin use itself or the context of its use (eg, unfavorable cervix, need for multiple induction agents) was associated with uterine rupture.

In a multicenter study of 33,699 women undergoing TOLAC, augmentation or induction of labor also was associated with an increased risk of uterine rupture compared with spontaneous labor (0.4 % for spontaneous labor, 0.9% for augmented labor, 1.1% for oxytocin alone, and 1.4% for induction with prostaglandins with or without oxytocin) (4). A secondary analysis of 11,778 women from this study with one prior low transverse cesarean delivery showed an increase in uterine rupture only in women undergoing induction who had no prior vaginal delivery (1.5% versus 0.8%, P=.02). Additionally, uterine rupture was no more likely to occur when labor induction was initiated with an unfavorable cervix than with a favorable cervix (91). Another secondary analysis examined the association between maximum oxytocin dose and the risk of uterine rupture (94). They noted a dose response effect with increasing risk of uterine rupture with higher maximum doses of oxytocin. Because studies have not identified a clear threshold for rupture, an upper limit for oxytocin dosing with TOLAC has not been established.

Induced labor is less likely to result in VBAC than spontaneous labor (44, 47, 92, 99). There is some evidence that this is the case regardless of whether the cervix is favorable or unfavorable, although an unfavorable cervix decreases the chance of success to the greatest extent (91, 100, 101). These factors may affect patient and health care provider decisions as they consider the risks and benefits of TOLAC associated with labor induction.

Given the lack of compelling data suggesting increased risk with mechanical dilation and transcervical catheters, such interventions may be an option for TOLAC candidates with an unfavorable cervix.

The Guise 2010 Evidence Report is another excellent resource that reviewed VBAC research published to date. It talks extensively about uterine rupture in induced births on pages 58 – 69 and concluded (emphasis mine):

The strength of evidence on the risk of uterine rupture with pharmacologic IOL [induction of labor] methods was low due to lack of precision in estimates and inconsistency in findings. The overall risk of rupture with any IOL method at term was 1.5 percent [1 in 67] and 1.0 percent [1 in 100] when any GA [gestational age] is considered. Among women with GA greater than 40 weeks, the rate was highest at 3.2 percent [1 in 31]. Evaluation of the evidence on specific methods of IOL reveal that the lowest rate occurs with oxytocin [Pitocin] at 1.1 percent [1 in 91], then PGE2 [prostaglandin E2] at 2 percent [1 in 50], and the highest rate with misoprostol [Cytotec] at 6 percent [1 in 17]. These findings should be interpreted with caution as there was imprecision and inconsistency in the results among these studies. The risk of uterine rupture with mechanical methods of IOL is understudied. Other harms were inadequately reported to make conclusions. Relative to women with spontaneous labor, there was no increase in risk of rupture among those induced at term. However, the available evidence on women with induced labor after 40 weeks GA indicates an increased risk compared with spontaneous labor (risk difference 1.8 percent; 95 percent CI: 0.1 to 3.5 percent). The NNH [number needed to harm] in this group is 56 (for every 56 women greater than 40 weeks GA with IOL during a TOL [trial of labor], one additional rupture will occur compared with having spontaneous labor).

So the bottom line is: more large, good quality studies that control for induction are needed.

What is too risky?

As ACOG (2010) states in their latest Practice Bulletin:

Respect for patient autonomy supports the concept that patients should be allowed to accept increased levels of risk, however, patients should be clearly informed of such potential increase in risk and management alternatives.

I agree and believe that each individual woman has the right to informed consent and, together with her care provider, can make the best decision for her individual situation. I think it’s hard to argue that women seeking VBA2C, home birth, or unassisted birth should have the right to accept the elevated levels of risk that come with those decisions and yet say that the elevated risk that comes with induced VBACs is unacceptable.

Keep in mind that while the risk of rupture is higher in an induced VBAC, the risk is similar to the risk of rupture in a VBA2C (0.9% per Landon 2006). So it’s hard for one to support VBA2C and yet demonize a VBA1C induced for medical indication by saying the risk of rupture is to high.

It is also important to note that 90 out of 91 Pitocin induced TOLACs do not rupture (Landon, 2004 & Guise, 2010). So while the risk is generally higher in induced/ augmented labors, the overall risk is still low and occurs at a rate comparable to other obstetrical emergencies.

Myth: Most ruptures occur in induced/augmented labors

It’s imperative that women seeking VBAC understand that the single factor that increases their risk of uterine rupture the most is their prior cesarean section. And while having your labor induced/augmented does increase your risk of rupture, please do not believe the myth that a spontaneous labor provides complete protection from uterine rupture.

To disprove this myth, I direct you to “the largest prospective report of uterine rupture in women without a previous cesarean in a Western country” which found that most ruptures occur in spontaneous labors (Zwart, 2009). Zwart differentiated between uterine rupture and dehiscence and found (emphasis mine):

of the 208 scarred and unscarred uterine ruptures, 130 (62.5%) occurred during spontaneous labor reflecting 72% of scarred ruptures and 56% of unscarred ruptures.

It is interesting to note that 16% of unscarred ruptures (representing 4 unscarred women) and 9% of scarred ruptures (representing 16 scarred women) happened before the onset of labor (Zwart, 2009).

What I would do

If there was a medical reason for my baby to born (as detailed by the Mayo Clinic above), and it was the difference between a VBAC and a repeat cesarean, and I had a favorable Bishop’s score (download the app), I would consent to a foley catheter and/or low-dose Pitocin induction (not Cytotec or Cervidil).

If I was induced or augmented with Pitocin, I would be comfortable with continuous external fetal monitoring. Some hospitals do offer telemetry which is wireless monitoring giving you more freedom of movement. I’ve even seen telemetry in tube tops (naturally I can’t find a link to it now, if you have a link, can you leave a comment?) and units that can be worn in birth tubs. It’s good to call the hospital beforehand to determine what kind of telemetry monitoring units they offer and to confirm that it’s not lost in a closet.

Final thoughts

There is no doubt that Pitocin is overused in America and often results in unnecessary emergency cesareans. However, it’s important not to cloud the two issues: medically unnecessary inductions and inductions with medical indication. There are situations where induction/ augmentation are reasonable and can give the mom one last option before having a cesarean. Thankfully, a low-dose Pitocin and/or foley catheter induction “remains an option” in women planning a VBAC according to ACOG. I think that is a good thing. Download my free report on uterine rupture myths to learn more.

Further reading

What do you think?
Leave a comment.

What do you think? Leave a comment.


  1. Hi Jen,
    I’m 41+6 gestation and I am booked to go in tomorrow morning for IOL using syntocinon. Other than post dates the reason for this is diffused calcification of placenta, low liquor, ruptured membranes, baby is weighting 4k on scan, and 1 previous c section. In the 1st instance I wanted a homebirth but now want to be safe and am going in. However I would still like to aim for a VBAC but would ideally like to avoid risky interventions. What is the risk of syntocinon over waiting (risk of infection/rupture/placental compromise)? Urgent information please.

    • I am not a medical professional and so I cannot tell you what your risks of waiting are versus getting induced tomorrow. I recommend asking your care provider tomorrow that question so you can make an informed decision tomorrow that you can feel good about.

      I can tell you that ACOG says that the risk of stillbirth and other complications do increase after 42 weeks. The higher your Bishop’s score is tomorrow (google it), the more likely your induction will result in a vaginal birth. I’ll be thinking of you and hoping everything goes smoothly!

      Get a good night’s sleep!

  2. Hello, I’m a gravida 4 para 3, currently pregnant, mom. My first 2 (girls) were successful vaginal births induced (with cytotec initially, then augmented with amniotomy and/or pit) at 39 weeks due to non-symptomatic gestational hypertension. My 3rd (my son) was also induced (cytotec) at 38 weeks due to symptomatic (headaches, although non-preeclamptic) gestational hypertension. My son developed non reassuring fetal heart tones and I had an emergency c section with general anesthesia. Given my history of GH, although not a guarantee, I think it’s reasonable to anticipate it with this pregnancy, making induction likely (if I were to opt for TOLAC). My concern though, is that this is a twin gestation, and I cant’ find any data on both Twins AND induction due to GH (likely because there isn’t any, lol). Any guidance would be appreciated.

    • Hi Em!

      I haven’t seen any research looking at twin induction due to GH, it might be out there though.

      Your best bet is to get a couple opinions from VBAC friendly obstetricians in your area.

      Best wishes,


  3. Thanks for this. I’ve been induced twice now, both for medically indicated reasons (I carried my first to 42 weeks and my second to 43, and her heart rate kept dropping during the NSTs). At 43 weeks with my second, after 30 hours of ineffective, induced labor and a continued troubling heart rate, we agreed with my Dr that a C-section was the best route. When I get pregnant again, I’ll be faced with scheduling a 2nd cesarean or trying for a VBAC. With my track record, I simply can’t expect to go into labor spontaneously. If I choose a VBAC, which I hope to unless there is a good medical reason not to, it will most likely have to be aided by medically indicated induction.

  4. Our first born was an emergency C-sect 21 months before, due to pre-eclampsia on g. week #34. My wife (35) preferred a VBAC for baby #2 (also a girl) due 01/2016.
    The 2nd birth was a successful VBAC but there were lessons learned:
    -we should have studied which hospital/doctor would enable the VBAC the most flexible way – not at any cost, but to a reasonable extent. We were lucky to have the best doctor around on his schedule that time. We could have arranged a doctor if we wished to do so but only before g.week #20.
    -last 3 hours of labor was induced using oxytocin which was said to be not allowed on previous visits but the doctor conducting birth did let it
    -infusion and constant baby hr monitoring was used all time, no foods/drinks allowed.
    -after delivery,a touch-in check of the scar (previously measured by ultra sound as 5mm thick) – was performed in a short narcosis,so breastfeeding was almost instantly allowed afterwards.S car was found intact.
    Venue: Hungary,outside of Budapest

  5. sorry, this will be a VBAC attempt for me. I have had one vaginal birth after induction (2005) and one spontaneous labor that ended in a c-section due to my inability to push out a posterior baby (2008).

  6. I have a question. I am 37 weeks with a breech baby (has been breech since 32 weeks). Yesterday I had an external version by a maternal fetal medicine MD. I scheduled this myself as my office doesn’t do them. The baby turned, but then turned back breech shortly after I left the hospital. The MD had said if they had to try the version again, that they could induce labor immediately afterwards. My first thought was that this would be difficult for me. My office that I have been seeing for my whole pregnancy just wants to do a scheduled c-section on December 10th. My due date is December 14th. It seems as if I switch my care to the provider that did the version, I may have more options. I honestly don’t know what to do though. Is is safe to be induced after a version for a baby that has been persistently breech? Should I just stick with the plan and get the c-section at 39 weeks? Should I just wait and see what happens? I mean baby could turn by himself and I could go into spontaneous labor. Of course this is what I want, but what if it hasn’t happened yet by December 9th. I really don’t want the section.

  7. Where can I find the original information that led to this statement:
    Thankfully, a low-dose Pitocin and/or foley catheter induction “remains an option” in women planning a VBAC according to ACOG.

    I would very much like to have this as a last-resort option as I am overdue, but my OB does not want to use petocin to induce at all, even in small doses with a foley catheter (leaving me with no options other than spontaneous labor or scheduled c-section). I would very much like to find where this procedure and risks are mentioned by the ACOG so that I can try to start a discussion of using this option with my OB. Thank you!!

    • Stephanie,

      On page 454 under the heading “Induction and Augmentation of Labor,” ACOG states, “Induction of labor for maternal or fetal indication remains an option for women undergoing TOLAC” and then goes on to discuss several studies which illustrate that Pitocin has lower rupture rates than prostaglandins. ACOG also states that Cytotec is contraindicated in VBACs here, “Evidence from small studies show that the use of misoprostol [Cytotec] in women who have had cesarean deliveries is associated with an increased risk of uterine rupture. Therefore, misoprostol should not be used for third trimester cervical ripening or labor induction in patients who have had a cesarean delivery or major uterine surgery.”

      Some OBs don’t like to induce, others are ok with it. ACOG says it “remains an option.” Unfortunately, when OBs do not wish to induce, moms are left with no choice. It’s doubtful that showing her ACOG’s guidelines will make an impact on her, but it’s always worth a try.

      You can chat with VBAC supportive OBs over on the VBAC Facts Community.



    • I would love to know what Stephanie ended up doing. I am in the same exact situation and tomorrow I will be 6 days late and have an appt. for an internal. im not sure where it will go from there but I do know that I will be getting a non stress test on the baby and an u/s (probably the next day) My Dr keeps saying there was no point in checking me bc they cant induce and I need to go naturally, but now shes saying I really shouldnt wait past 41 weeks (according to them is Tues (2days away) according to me who knows my exact conception was 2 days ago. Anyways she says that ultimately I am the boss but she keeps bringing up a c-section even tho I have expressed how much I dont want one especially having a 21 month old to care for too. I will be bringing up the low dose pitocin approach. I have also read somewhere ese that some Dr’s are more comfortable with that if you have started dilating to help kick start labor. So we shall see.

      • Hi Theresa!

        Hopefully Stephanie will see your comment and respond. I’m so sorry you are in this situation. It’s certainly not ideal.

        I posted your question here to get more feedback.



  8. I’m not so sure I trust that Mayo Clinic quote since it put abruption in the VBAC catagory when as Raeann point out it should be a c-section, and they put Low aminiotic fluid and slower growth in the time to do something catagory when it really should be time to watch and wait. And then the fact that pre-eclampsia was not specifically mentioned and high blood pressure and diabetis are lumped into the last bullet which should have been near the top. I would expect them to put the most dangerous thing first and the least studied last. Barring that I would expect the most often first. I don’t think they did either. Someone really should come up with a list of reasons to induce before 40 weeks and reasons to induce after 40 weeks, after 41 or after 42.

  9. Under the heading “Medical Reasons for Induction” I was surprised to find placental abruption. Those are typically resolved only by C-Section rather than induction. Abruption typically causes severe fetal distress and/or fetal death, not to mention internal maternal hemmorhage. It’s an emergency C-Section situation.

    • Not all abruptions are complete. A partial abruption can still be born vaginally as long as baby is okay.

  10. Thanks for the article. My 2nd VBAC was augmented using a foley bulb and pitocin. I was overdue and had Gestational Diabetes, but was thankful that my doctor and the hospital gave me that option.



  1. Tips on How to Have a Successful VBAC | Baby Chick™ - […] If you are wondering why inductions are normally off the table for VBAC mamas, the reason is the drug…
  2. VBAC Tips and Tricks • Expecting New Life Birth Services - […] VBACfacts.com. Along with a ton of other great content, Jen Kamel sums up the types of care providers you’ll…
  3. Hannah’s Birth Story | Mel's Place - […] Hannah was my 4th pregnancy, we were positive that our best option would again be a VBAC.  Even though…
  4. Myth: VBACs should never be induced | SeeBaby Midwifery - […] Myth: VBACs should never be induced […]
  5. VBAC & CS Links | Mel's Place - […] Myth: VBACs should never be induced « VBAC Facts […]
  6. Judge Rules Mentally Ill Pregnant Woman Can Have Emergency C-Section - [...] to have an induced labor and/or a medical birth (Let’s not forget that induced VBACs carry slightly higher risks…
  7. Should A VBAC Labor Be Induced? | Modern Alternative Pregnancy - [...] is a myth that VBACS should never be induced.  Spontaneous labor is always preferable to induced or [...]

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Jen Kamel

As a nationally recognized consumer advocate and Founder of VBAC Facts®, Jen Kamel helps birth professionals, and cesarean parents, achieve clarity on vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) through her educational courses, training programs, and consulting services. She speaks at conferences across the country, presents Grand Rounds at hospitals, advises advocates seeking legislative change in their state, and serves as a expert witness in legal proceedings. She envisions a time when every pregnant person seeking VBAC has access to unbiased information, respectful providers, and community support, so they can plan the birth of their choosing in the setting they desire.

Learn more >

Free Report Reveals...

Parents pregnant after a cesarean face so much misinformation about VBAC. As a result, many who are good VBAC candidates are coerced into repeat cesareans. This free report provides quick clarity on 5 uterine rupture myths so you can tell fact from fiction and avoid the bait & switch.

VBAC Facts does not provide any medical advice and the information provided should not be so construed or used. Nothing provided by VBAC Facts is intended to replace the services of a qualified physician or midwife or to be a substitute for medical advice of a qualified physician or midwife. You should not rely on anything provided by VBAC Facts and you should consult a qualified health care professional in all matters relating to your health. Amazon Associates Disclosure: Jen Kamel is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. Created By: Jen Kamel | Copyright 2007-2018 VBAC Facts. All Rights Reserved. | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy