229
Views
7
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Obstetrics

A prospective double blind study using oral versus vaginal misoprostol for labour induction

, &
Pages 461-464 | Published online: 06 Jul 2010
 

Abstract

This prospective double blind study was undertaken to compare the safety and efficacy of oral vs vaginal misoprostol in equivalent doses (50 μg) for induction of labour. A total of 128 term pregnancies with indication for induction of labour were allocated to two groups to receive 50 μg misoprostol orally or vaginally, every 4 h until adequate contractions were achieved or a maximum of 200 μg dose. Induction to delivery interval was significantly shorter in the vaginal group compared with the oral group (14.6 h vs 22.5 h; p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the groups with respect to mode of delivery, neonatal outcome and maternal side-effects. However, the incidence of abnormal contractility pattern was more common in the vaginal group (10/68, 14.6%) as compared with the oral group (4/60, 6.6%) (p = 0.146).

Declaration of interest: The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.