TY - JOUR
T1 - Oral Misoprostol Solution more Effective than a Sublingual Route for Induction of Labor
T2 - A Prospective Comparative Trial at Tertiary Care Center
AU - Shetty, Jyothi
AU - Upadhya, Rekha
AU - Rajendran, Rishpana
N1 - Funding Information:
Authors acknowledge the cooperation from patients and the “Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology”.
Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s).
PY - 2023/3/1
Y1 - 2023/3/1
N2 - Objective: To assess the safety and effectiveness of 25 µg of oral misoprostol solution at the same dose as sublingual misoprostol for labor induction. Design: A prospective comparative trial. Materials and methods: The study included 82 women with term singleton pregnancies who were selected for labor induction. Forty-two patients received sublingual misoprostol every 3 hours, and 40 patients had oral misoprostol solution every 2 hours (six doses). Results: Within 24 hours of induction, 82.5% of the oral group’s women delivered vaginally. The sublingual group had 66% women. The Chi-square test was applied to compare two routes, and the result revealed no statistically considerable difference with a p-value of 0.101. In comparison to the oral group (4.43 ± 2.8 hours), the sublingual group (6.25 ± 3.7 hours) had a longer mean interval between the last misoprostol dosage and the onset of labor. Sublingual and oral groups had mean induction to vaginal delivery intervals of 12 ± 5.2 hours and 9 ± 4.5 hours, respectively. A p-value of 0.02 indicated that the difference was statistically considerable. In the sublingual group, 14.2% of patients had meconium-stained liquor, and in the oral group, 10% of patients had meconium-stained liquor. Conclusion: As per the study outcomes, oral misoprostol solution and 25 µg of sublingual misoprostol are both secure and reliable approaches to induce labor in females with an unfavorable cervix. For several measurements, including induction time and vaginal birth rate, we discovered that oral misoprostol solution was more efficient than the sublingual method.
AB - Objective: To assess the safety and effectiveness of 25 µg of oral misoprostol solution at the same dose as sublingual misoprostol for labor induction. Design: A prospective comparative trial. Materials and methods: The study included 82 women with term singleton pregnancies who were selected for labor induction. Forty-two patients received sublingual misoprostol every 3 hours, and 40 patients had oral misoprostol solution every 2 hours (six doses). Results: Within 24 hours of induction, 82.5% of the oral group’s women delivered vaginally. The sublingual group had 66% women. The Chi-square test was applied to compare two routes, and the result revealed no statistically considerable difference with a p-value of 0.101. In comparison to the oral group (4.43 ± 2.8 hours), the sublingual group (6.25 ± 3.7 hours) had a longer mean interval between the last misoprostol dosage and the onset of labor. Sublingual and oral groups had mean induction to vaginal delivery intervals of 12 ± 5.2 hours and 9 ± 4.5 hours, respectively. A p-value of 0.02 indicated that the difference was statistically considerable. In the sublingual group, 14.2% of patients had meconium-stained liquor, and in the oral group, 10% of patients had meconium-stained liquor. Conclusion: As per the study outcomes, oral misoprostol solution and 25 µg of sublingual misoprostol are both secure and reliable approaches to induce labor in females with an unfavorable cervix. For several measurements, including induction time and vaginal birth rate, we discovered that oral misoprostol solution was more efficient than the sublingual method.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85160026116
UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85160026116&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.5005/jp-journals-10006-2205
DO - 10.5005/jp-journals-10006-2205
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85160026116
SN - 0974-8938
VL - 15
SP - 167
EP - 171
JO - Journal of SAFOG
JF - Journal of SAFOG
IS - 2
ER -