![Sample our Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing & Allied Health journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5944/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Medicine-Dentistry-Nursing-Allied-Health.jpg"})
Abstract
Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of oral prostaglandin (PG) in solution versus vaginal PG gel for labor induction.
Design: A retrospective study.
Methods: Data from original obstetric records at a university hospital in Sweden 2012–2013.
Results: In all women, oral PG resulted in vaginal birth (VB) < 24 h in 66% compared to 80% with vaginal PG (p < 0.001), and cesarean section (CS) in 19% versus 32% (p = 0.02). In primiparous women, oral PG was followed by VB <24 h in 54% compared to 71% (p = 0.01), and CS in 25% versus 41% (p = 0.03). In women with an unripe cervix, oral PG lead to VB <24 h in 66% compared to 79% (p = 0.01), and CS in 21% versus 33% (p = 0.04). Despite a longer induction to vaginal delivery interval with oral PG, the rates of obstetric bleeding, chorioamnionitis, and neonatal asphyxia were not increased.
Conclusions: Oral PG in solution was less effective than vaginal PG gel in achieving VB <24 h. However, oral PG was safer, since it resulted in fewer CSs without increasing maternal morbidity or neonatal asphyxia.
Declaration of interest
The authors report no declaration of interest.