Here is a relatively recent study on the effectiveness of it plus lists some of the problems. I highlighted the relative stuff in pink. Basically it reduced the risk of carrying to 42 weeks but didn't induce before then.
I regret having mine done with my third. I think it made my labor longer and crampier and my baby was malpositioned. My second birth was 6 hours my 3rd was 18. I won't do it again.
Membrane Sweeping and Prevention of Post-Term Pregnancy in Low-Risk
>Pregnancies: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Obstetrical & Gynecological
>Survey. 61(8):507-508, August 2006.
>de Miranda, E; van der Bom, J G.; Bonsel, G J.; Bleker, O P.; Rosendaal, F R.
>
>Abstract:
>Postterm pregnancy, defined as a gestational age of 42 weeks or longer,
>has been associated with increased perinatal morbidity and mortality.
>"Sweeping" the membranes-separating them digitally from the lower urine
>segment-is a simple means of promoting spontaneous labor presumably by
>increasing prostaglandin levels in the maternal circulation as well as
>local prostaglandin production. Both of these effects help to ripen the
>cervix. However, trials of membrane sweeping have yielded inconsistent
>results. This randomized trial evaluated membrane sweeping starting at 41
>weeks gestation in 51 midwifery practices in The Netherlands. All
>participants had a single fetus in cephalic presentation and lacked
>pregnancy complications and risk factors. The lower membranes were
>separated to the extent possible from their cervical attachment sites
>using 3 passes of the examining fingers. When the cervix was closed,
>precluding sweeping, it was massaged. Sweeping was repeated every 48 hours
>a maximum of 3 times until labor began or gestational age reached 42
>weeks. Of 742 women admitted to the trial, 375 were allocated to membrane
>sweeping and 367 to a control group. The 2 groups were similar at the
>outset.Sweeping significantly lowered the proportion of postterm
>pregnancies from 41% to 23%. Results were unchanged when only women dated
>by a first-trimester ultrasound study were analyzed. In the group having
>membrane sweeping, 27% of women with a Bishop score less than 6 at
>baseline and 9% of those with an index of 6 or higher had postterm
>pregnancies. Sweeping reduced the interval between randomization and
>delivery by 1 day on average, and it significantly increased the chance of
>spontaneous labor starting before 42 weeks gestation. Both nulliparous and
>parous women benefitted from the procedure. In parous women, sweeping made
>it significantly more likely that delivery would take place in a primary
>care setting. Women having membrane sweeping were less likely to receive
>prostaglandins to induce labor. Adverse effects were similarly frequent in
>the 2 groups except
for more frequent bleeding in those assigned to
>membrane sweeping.
A majority of women felt that the procedure was
>"somewhat" painful and 17% found it to be "painful" or "very painful."
>Nearly 90% of women would choose membrane sweeping in their next
>pregnancy.Sweeping the membranes at 41 weeks gestation can be expected to
>considerably lower the risk of a postterm pregnancy at 42 weeks or later.
>It is a simple technique that does not require hospital admission.(C) 2006
>
>OBJECTIVE: To estimate if membrane sweeping increases the rate of prelabor
>rupture of membranes. METHODS: This randomized trial of term,
>uncomplicated pregnancies included 300 patients. Patients were randomly
>assigned into sweep or no-sweep groups, with patients and delivering
>providers blinded to group allocation. Only the examining provider in the
>clinic was unblinded to group allocation. Membranes were then swept or not
>swept at each weekly visit from 38 weeks of gestation onward, depending on
>the randomization. Data collected included parity, cervix examination at
>each visit, estimated gestational age at delivery, rupture of membranes,
>and maternal or fetal complications. RESULTS: A total of 162 patients were
>randomly assigned to the membrane sweep group and 138 to the no-sweep
>group. There was no difference in baseline characteristics or obstetric
>and neonatal outcomes between the groups.
The average gestational age at
>delivery and induction rate were not different. The overall prelabor
>rupture of membranes rate was not significantly higher in the membrane
>sweep group (12% compared with 7%) (P=.19); however, patients with a
>cervix more than 1 cm dilated at time of membrane sweeping were more
>likely to have prelabor rupture of membranes if they were in the membrane
>sweep group (9.1% compared with 0%; relative risk 1.10, 95% confidence
>interval 1.03-1.18).
CONCLUSION: No benefit in gestational age at delivery
>or reduction of postmaturity occurred from membrane sweeping. Although the
>overall prelabor rupture of membranes rates were similar, patients with
>membrane sweeping occurring at more than 1 cm cervical dilation may be at
>increased risk of prelabor rupture of membranes. CLINICAL TRIAL
>REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov,
>
www.clinicaltrials.gov<
http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/>, NCT00294242. LEVEL
>OF EVIDENCE: I. PMID: 18515514 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
