A Comparison of Two Dosing Regimens of Misoprostol in Labour Induction: A Randomised Controlled Trial
Résumé fourni par la source
Objective: To compare the effectiveness and safety of 50μg of sublingual misoprostol administered six (6) hourly to that of 50μg of vaginal misoprostol administered four (4) hourly. Methodology: A non-blinded, randomized controlled trial conducted from Sept 1, 2014, to Nov 31, 2014, at a tertiary hospital in Ghana. Hundred and sixty women with medical or obstetric indications for labour induction were randomized into two groups. Results: The rate of vaginal delivery, caesarean section, uterine tachysystole and uterine hyperstimulation were similar in both groups. Sixty-three (78.8%) and 66 (82.5%) mothers in the vaginal and sublingual groups delivered vaginally. More (10.0%) mothers in the vagina group required emergency caesarean for foetal distress. Six (vaginal group) and 8 (sublingual group) of the mothers required emergency caesarean for cephalopelvic disproportion. Three mothers from each group had an emergency caesarean section due to failed labour induction. Almost the same number of mothers had uterine tachysystole in both groups. More (3.8%) mothers in the vaginal group had uterine hyperstimulation. Differences in the mean induction delivery interval and the need for oxytocin augmentation were not significant. No differences were found in the intrapartum passage of meconium, blood loss in the third stage of labour, 5-minute Apgar score <7, and neonatal intensive care unit admissions. Conclusion: The sublingual regimen was as effective and safe as the vaginal regimen in achieving vaginal delivery.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- A Comparison of Two Dosing Regimens of Misoprostol in Labour Induction: A Randomised Controlled Trial
- Date Crossref
- 15/03/2023
- Éditeur
- Ghana College of Physicians and Surgeons
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.