COMPARISON OF ORAL (20 µG 2 HOURLY) VERSUS VAGINAL (25 µG 6 HOURLY) MISOPROSTOL FOR INDUCTION OF LABOUR IN TERM PREGNANCIES

Objective: To compare the outcome of oral misoprostol (20µg 2 hourly) with vaginal misoprostol (25µg 6hourly) for induction of labour in term pregnancies, in terms of frequency of vaginal delivery and cesarean section. Study Design: Randomized clinical trial. Place and Duration of Study: Depar...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Tahmina Yousaf, Zakia Asher, Saira Afghan, Komail Malik
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Army Medical College Rawalpindi 2019
Materias:	induction of labour oral and vaginal route Medicine R Medicine (General) R5-920
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/bddd5106f1c44b1c8fc5a2c1c3deeff6
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:bddd5106f1c44b1c8fc5a2c1c3deeff6
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:bddd5106f1c44b1c8fc5a2c1c3deeff62021-11-12T06:54:48ZCOMPARISON OF ORAL (20 µG 2 HOURLY) VERSUS VAGINAL (25 µG 6 HOURLY) MISOPROSTOL FOR INDUCTION OF LABOUR IN TERM PREGNANCIES0030-96482411-8842https://doaj.org/article/bddd5106f1c44b1c8fc5a2c1c3deeff62019-04-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.pafmj.org/index.php/PAFMJ/article/view/2751/2156https://doaj.org/toc/0030-9648https://doaj.org/toc/2411-8842Objective: To compare the outcome of oral misoprostol (20µg 2 hourly) with vaginal misoprostol (25µg 6hourly) for induction of labour in term pregnancies, in terms of frequency of vaginal delivery and cesarean section. Study Design: Randomized clinical trial. Place and Duration of Study: Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Unit II, Maternal and Child Health Centre, Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences, Islamabad from, Jan to Dec 2015. Subjects: All pregnant women at term (>37 weeks gestation) with obstetric and medical indication for induction of labour and having Bishop Score ≤6 were included in this study. Parity ≥4, previous history of obstetric and gynecological surgery and suspected cephalopelvic disproportion were excluded. Material and Methods: The study was conducted after approval from the ethical committee of the hospital. The subjects fulfilling inclusion criteria were enrolled after informed consent. The women randomized to group A received 20 ug oral misoprostol 2 hourly orally up to a maximum of 12 doses and the women randomized to group B received 25 micro-grammisoprostol vaginally and was repeated at 6 hours interval upto a maximum of 4 doses. Randomization was done using lottery method. Data was entered on predesigned proforma and was analyzed using SPSS version 10. Results: Ninety five women were randomly assigned to group A or B. In oral misoprostol group, 91 (95.8%) had vaginal delivery and 4 (4.2%) women needed C-section compared to 379 (83.2%) vaginal delivery and 16 (16.8%) women need C section in vaginal misoprostol group (p-value0.004). Conclusion: It is concluded that women randomized to oral misoprostol had better obstetrics outcome as compared to vaginal misoprostol.Tahmina YousafZakia AsherSaira AfghanKomail MalikArmy Medical College Rawalpindiarticleinduction of labouroral and vaginal routeMedicineRMedicine (General)R5-920ENPakistan Armed Forces Medical Journal, Vol 69, Iss 2, Pp 346-350 (2019)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	induction of labour oral and vaginal route Medicine R Medicine (General) R5-920
spellingShingle	induction of labour oral and vaginal route Medicine R Medicine (General) R5-920 Tahmina Yousaf Zakia Asher Saira Afghan Komail Malik COMPARISON OF ORAL (20 µG 2 HOURLY) VERSUS VAGINAL (25 µG 6 HOURLY) MISOPROSTOL FOR INDUCTION OF LABOUR IN TERM PREGNANCIES
description	Objective: To compare the outcome of oral misoprostol (20µg 2 hourly) with vaginal misoprostol (25µg 6hourly) for induction of labour in term pregnancies, in terms of frequency of vaginal delivery and cesarean section. Study Design: Randomized clinical trial. Place and Duration of Study: Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Unit II, Maternal and Child Health Centre, Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences, Islamabad from, Jan to Dec 2015. Subjects: All pregnant women at term (>37 weeks gestation) with obstetric and medical indication for induction of labour and having Bishop Score ≤6 were included in this study. Parity ≥4, previous history of obstetric and gynecological surgery and suspected cephalopelvic disproportion were excluded. Material and Methods: The study was conducted after approval from the ethical committee of the hospital. The subjects fulfilling inclusion criteria were enrolled after informed consent. The women randomized to group A received 20 ug oral misoprostol 2 hourly orally up to a maximum of 12 doses and the women randomized to group B received 25 micro-grammisoprostol vaginally and was repeated at 6 hours interval upto a maximum of 4 doses. Randomization was done using lottery method. Data was entered on predesigned proforma and was analyzed using SPSS version 10. Results: Ninety five women were randomly assigned to group A or B. In oral misoprostol group, 91 (95.8%) had vaginal delivery and 4 (4.2%) women needed C-section compared to 379 (83.2%) vaginal delivery and 16 (16.8%) women need C section in vaginal misoprostol group (p-value0.004). Conclusion: It is concluded that women randomized to oral misoprostol had better obstetrics outcome as compared to vaginal misoprostol.
format	article
author	Tahmina Yousaf Zakia Asher Saira Afghan Komail Malik
author_facet	Tahmina Yousaf Zakia Asher Saira Afghan Komail Malik
author_sort	Tahmina Yousaf
title	COMPARISON OF ORAL (20 µG 2 HOURLY) VERSUS VAGINAL (25 µG 6 HOURLY) MISOPROSTOL FOR INDUCTION OF LABOUR IN TERM PREGNANCIES
title_short	COMPARISON OF ORAL (20 µG 2 HOURLY) VERSUS VAGINAL (25 µG 6 HOURLY) MISOPROSTOL FOR INDUCTION OF LABOUR IN TERM PREGNANCIES
title_full	COMPARISON OF ORAL (20 µG 2 HOURLY) VERSUS VAGINAL (25 µG 6 HOURLY) MISOPROSTOL FOR INDUCTION OF LABOUR IN TERM PREGNANCIES
title_fullStr	COMPARISON OF ORAL (20 µG 2 HOURLY) VERSUS VAGINAL (25 µG 6 HOURLY) MISOPROSTOL FOR INDUCTION OF LABOUR IN TERM PREGNANCIES
title_full_unstemmed	COMPARISON OF ORAL (20 µG 2 HOURLY) VERSUS VAGINAL (25 µG 6 HOURLY) MISOPROSTOL FOR INDUCTION OF LABOUR IN TERM PREGNANCIES
title_sort	comparison of oral (20 µg 2 hourly) versus vaginal (25 µg 6 hourly) misoprostol for induction of labour in term pregnancies
publisher	Army Medical College Rawalpindi
publishDate	2019
url	https://doaj.org/article/bddd5106f1c44b1c8fc5a2c1c3deeff6
work_keys_str_mv	AT tahminayousaf comparisonoforal20μg2hourlyversusvaginal25μg6hourlymisoprostolforinductionoflabourintermpregnancies AT zakiaasher comparisonoforal20μg2hourlyversusvaginal25μg6hourlymisoprostolforinductionoflabourintermpregnancies AT sairaafghan comparisonoforal20μg2hourlyversusvaginal25μg6hourlymisoprostolforinductionoflabourintermpregnancies AT komailmalik comparisonoforal20μg2hourlyversusvaginal25μg6hourlymisoprostolforinductionoflabourintermpregnancies
_version_	1718431132696969216

COMPARISON OF ORAL (20 µG 2 HOURLY) VERSUS VAGINAL (25 µG 6 HOURLY) MISOPROSTOL FOR INDUCTION OF LABOUR IN TERM PREGNANCIES

Ejemplares similares