A randomised comparison of patient satisfaction with vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for induction of labour at term
Objective To compare patient satisfaction with two routes of misoprostol for term labour induction. Design Prospective randomised trial. Setting Tertiary care hospital. Population A total of 170 women admitted at ≥37 weeks of gestation for induction of labour. Methods Women were randomised to r...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology 2007-10, Vol.114 (10), p.1215-1221 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1221 |
---|---|
container_issue | 10 |
container_start_page | 1215 |
container_title | BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology |
container_volume | 114 |
creator | Nassar, AH Awwad, J Khalil, AM Abu‐Musa, A Mehio, G Usta, IM |
description | Objective To compare patient satisfaction with two routes of misoprostol for term labour induction.
Design Prospective randomised trial.
Setting Tertiary care hospital.
Population A total of 170 women admitted at ≥37 weeks of gestation for induction of labour.
Methods Women were randomised to receive 50 micrograms of either sublingual or vaginal misoprostol.
Main outcome measures Patient satisfaction with the route of administration.
Results Despite a similar proportion reporting the labour induction as more painful than expected in both groups, a significantly lower proportion mentioned that the pelvic examinations were very painful in the sublingual group (19.7 versus 36.1%, relative risk [RR] 0.5, 95% CI 0.3–0.9). Request for analgesia was similar in both groups. More women in the sublingual group thought that the labour experience was better than expected (RR 2.0, 95% CI 1.2–3.3), had a positive attitude towards induction in subsequent pregnancies (RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1–2.3) and preferred the same route in subsequent pregnancies (RR 3.1, 95% CI 2.2–4.5). Mean number of misoprostol doses, oxytocin augmentation, tachysystole and hyperstimulation, induction to vaginal delivery interval, vaginal delivery after a single dose, vaginal birth within 12 and 24 hours, and caesarean delivery rates were similar in both groups.
Conclusion Sublingual misoprostol (50 micrograms) is associated with a significantly higher patient satisfaction rate compared with a similar dose of vaginal misoprostol. Sublingual administration offers additional choice to women, in particular those wishing to avoid vaginal administration. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01492.x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68290875</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>68290875</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4742-e7d8f76f26cb299ac29345a658a8a75df6369d6601d295e93292ed0b2848648c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkUtv1TAQhS0EoqXwF5CFBLsEZ5L4sWBRKqBUlbpp15ZjO8VXTnyJk9723zPpvWolVvVm_Pjm6IwPIbRiZYXr66asGlEVrAVZAmOiZFWjoLx_RY6fHl4_7lnBapBH5F3OG8YqDqx-S44qIYXgojkmu1M6mdGlIWTvqE3D1kwhp5Gmnm7NHPw404w198bOAe93Yf5D78xtGE2k2Enz0sUw3i54RJG0nVKeU6R9mmgY3bLvQrVourRM1Mx09tPwnrzpTcz-w6GekJufP67PzovLq1-_z04vC9uIBgovnOwF74HbDpQyFlTdtIa30kgjWtfzmivHOascqNarGhR4xzqQjeSNtPUJ-bLXRV9_F59njSatj9GMPi1ZcwmKSdEi-Ok_cIN2ccisAdpW4pc1CMk9ZHHKPPleb6cwmOlBV0yvyeiNXgPQawB6TUY_JqPvsfXjQX_pBu-eGw9RIPD5AJhsTewxFhvyM6cY5woAuW97bheif3ixAf394mrd1f8AybGqUA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>225581784</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A randomised comparison of patient satisfaction with vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for induction of labour at term</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Nassar, AH ; Awwad, J ; Khalil, AM ; Abu‐Musa, A ; Mehio, G ; Usta, IM</creator><creatorcontrib>Nassar, AH ; Awwad, J ; Khalil, AM ; Abu‐Musa, A ; Mehio, G ; Usta, IM</creatorcontrib><description>Objective To compare patient satisfaction with two routes of misoprostol for term labour induction.
Design Prospective randomised trial.
Setting Tertiary care hospital.
Population A total of 170 women admitted at ≥37 weeks of gestation for induction of labour.
Methods Women were randomised to receive 50 micrograms of either sublingual or vaginal misoprostol.
Main outcome measures Patient satisfaction with the route of administration.
Results Despite a similar proportion reporting the labour induction as more painful than expected in both groups, a significantly lower proportion mentioned that the pelvic examinations were very painful in the sublingual group (19.7 versus 36.1%, relative risk [RR] 0.5, 95% CI 0.3–0.9). Request for analgesia was similar in both groups. More women in the sublingual group thought that the labour experience was better than expected (RR 2.0, 95% CI 1.2–3.3), had a positive attitude towards induction in subsequent pregnancies (RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1–2.3) and preferred the same route in subsequent pregnancies (RR 3.1, 95% CI 2.2–4.5). Mean number of misoprostol doses, oxytocin augmentation, tachysystole and hyperstimulation, induction to vaginal delivery interval, vaginal delivery after a single dose, vaginal birth within 12 and 24 hours, and caesarean delivery rates were similar in both groups.
Conclusion Sublingual misoprostol (50 micrograms) is associated with a significantly higher patient satisfaction rate compared with a similar dose of vaginal misoprostol. Sublingual administration offers additional choice to women, in particular those wishing to avoid vaginal administration.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1470-0328</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1471-0528</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01492.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 17877674</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BIOGFQ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Administration, Intravaginal ; Administration, Sublingual ; Adult ; Biological and medical sciences ; Childbirth & labor ; Clinical outcomes ; Clinical trials ; Comparative studies ; Customer satisfaction ; Drug therapy ; Female ; Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics ; Humans ; Labor, Induced - methods ; Labor, Induced - psychology ; Medical sciences ; Misoprostol ; Obstetrics ; Oxytocics ; Patient Satisfaction ; Pregnancy ; Pregnancy Outcome ; Quality of care ; route of administration</subject><ispartof>BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 2007-10, Vol.114 (10), p.1215-1221</ispartof><rights>RCOG 2007 BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology</rights><rights>2007 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>2007 The Authors Journal compilation</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4742-e7d8f76f26cb299ac29345a658a8a75df6369d6601d295e93292ed0b2848648c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4742-e7d8f76f26cb299ac29345a658a8a75df6369d6601d295e93292ed0b2848648c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fj.1471-0528.2007.01492.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fj.1471-0528.2007.01492.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,1418,27929,27930,45579,45580</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=19066922$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17877674$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nassar, AH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Awwad, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Khalil, AM</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Abu‐Musa, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mehio, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Usta, IM</creatorcontrib><title>A randomised comparison of patient satisfaction with vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for induction of labour at term</title><title>BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology</title><addtitle>BJOG</addtitle><description>Objective To compare patient satisfaction with two routes of misoprostol for term labour induction.
Design Prospective randomised trial.
Setting Tertiary care hospital.
Population A total of 170 women admitted at ≥37 weeks of gestation for induction of labour.
Methods Women were randomised to receive 50 micrograms of either sublingual or vaginal misoprostol.
Main outcome measures Patient satisfaction with the route of administration.
Results Despite a similar proportion reporting the labour induction as more painful than expected in both groups, a significantly lower proportion mentioned that the pelvic examinations were very painful in the sublingual group (19.7 versus 36.1%, relative risk [RR] 0.5, 95% CI 0.3–0.9). Request for analgesia was similar in both groups. More women in the sublingual group thought that the labour experience was better than expected (RR 2.0, 95% CI 1.2–3.3), had a positive attitude towards induction in subsequent pregnancies (RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1–2.3) and preferred the same route in subsequent pregnancies (RR 3.1, 95% CI 2.2–4.5). Mean number of misoprostol doses, oxytocin augmentation, tachysystole and hyperstimulation, induction to vaginal delivery interval, vaginal delivery after a single dose, vaginal birth within 12 and 24 hours, and caesarean delivery rates were similar in both groups.
Conclusion Sublingual misoprostol (50 micrograms) is associated with a significantly higher patient satisfaction rate compared with a similar dose of vaginal misoprostol. Sublingual administration offers additional choice to women, in particular those wishing to avoid vaginal administration.</description><subject>Administration, Intravaginal</subject><subject>Administration, Sublingual</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Childbirth & labor</subject><subject>Clinical outcomes</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Comparative studies</subject><subject>Customer satisfaction</subject><subject>Drug therapy</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Labor, Induced - methods</subject><subject>Labor, Induced - psychology</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Misoprostol</subject><subject>Obstetrics</subject><subject>Oxytocics</subject><subject>Patient Satisfaction</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Pregnancy Outcome</subject><subject>Quality of care</subject><subject>route of administration</subject><issn>1470-0328</issn><issn>1471-0528</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkUtv1TAQhS0EoqXwF5CFBLsEZ5L4sWBRKqBUlbpp15ZjO8VXTnyJk9723zPpvWolVvVm_Pjm6IwPIbRiZYXr66asGlEVrAVZAmOiZFWjoLx_RY6fHl4_7lnBapBH5F3OG8YqDqx-S44qIYXgojkmu1M6mdGlIWTvqE3D1kwhp5Gmnm7NHPw404w198bOAe93Yf5D78xtGE2k2Enz0sUw3i54RJG0nVKeU6R9mmgY3bLvQrVourRM1Mx09tPwnrzpTcz-w6GekJufP67PzovLq1-_z04vC9uIBgovnOwF74HbDpQyFlTdtIa30kgjWtfzmivHOascqNarGhR4xzqQjeSNtPUJ-bLXRV9_F59njSatj9GMPi1ZcwmKSdEi-Ok_cIN2ccisAdpW4pc1CMk9ZHHKPPleb6cwmOlBV0yvyeiNXgPQawB6TUY_JqPvsfXjQX_pBu-eGw9RIPD5AJhsTewxFhvyM6cY5woAuW97bheif3ixAf394mrd1f8AybGqUA</recordid><startdate>200710</startdate><enddate>200710</enddate><creator>Nassar, AH</creator><creator>Awwad, J</creator><creator>Khalil, AM</creator><creator>Abu‐Musa, A</creator><creator>Mehio, G</creator><creator>Usta, IM</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Blackwell</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200710</creationdate><title>A randomised comparison of patient satisfaction with vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for induction of labour at term</title><author>Nassar, AH ; Awwad, J ; Khalil, AM ; Abu‐Musa, A ; Mehio, G ; Usta, IM</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4742-e7d8f76f26cb299ac29345a658a8a75df6369d6601d295e93292ed0b2848648c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Administration, Intravaginal</topic><topic>Administration, Sublingual</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Childbirth & labor</topic><topic>Clinical outcomes</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Comparative studies</topic><topic>Customer satisfaction</topic><topic>Drug therapy</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Labor, Induced - methods</topic><topic>Labor, Induced - psychology</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Misoprostol</topic><topic>Obstetrics</topic><topic>Oxytocics</topic><topic>Patient Satisfaction</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Pregnancy Outcome</topic><topic>Quality of care</topic><topic>route of administration</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nassar, AH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Awwad, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Khalil, AM</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Abu‐Musa, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mehio, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Usta, IM</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nassar, AH</au><au>Awwad, J</au><au>Khalil, AM</au><au>Abu‐Musa, A</au><au>Mehio, G</au><au>Usta, IM</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A randomised comparison of patient satisfaction with vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for induction of labour at term</atitle><jtitle>BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology</jtitle><addtitle>BJOG</addtitle><date>2007-10</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>114</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>1215</spage><epage>1221</epage><pages>1215-1221</pages><issn>1470-0328</issn><eissn>1471-0528</eissn><coden>BIOGFQ</coden><abstract>Objective To compare patient satisfaction with two routes of misoprostol for term labour induction.
Design Prospective randomised trial.
Setting Tertiary care hospital.
Population A total of 170 women admitted at ≥37 weeks of gestation for induction of labour.
Methods Women were randomised to receive 50 micrograms of either sublingual or vaginal misoprostol.
Main outcome measures Patient satisfaction with the route of administration.
Results Despite a similar proportion reporting the labour induction as more painful than expected in both groups, a significantly lower proportion mentioned that the pelvic examinations were very painful in the sublingual group (19.7 versus 36.1%, relative risk [RR] 0.5, 95% CI 0.3–0.9). Request for analgesia was similar in both groups. More women in the sublingual group thought that the labour experience was better than expected (RR 2.0, 95% CI 1.2–3.3), had a positive attitude towards induction in subsequent pregnancies (RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1–2.3) and preferred the same route in subsequent pregnancies (RR 3.1, 95% CI 2.2–4.5). Mean number of misoprostol doses, oxytocin augmentation, tachysystole and hyperstimulation, induction to vaginal delivery interval, vaginal delivery after a single dose, vaginal birth within 12 and 24 hours, and caesarean delivery rates were similar in both groups.
Conclusion Sublingual misoprostol (50 micrograms) is associated with a significantly higher patient satisfaction rate compared with a similar dose of vaginal misoprostol. Sublingual administration offers additional choice to women, in particular those wishing to avoid vaginal administration.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><pmid>17877674</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01492.x</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1470-0328 |
ispartof | BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology, 2007-10, Vol.114 (10), p.1215-1221 |
issn | 1470-0328 1471-0528 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68290875 |
source | MEDLINE; Access via Wiley Online Library |
subjects | Administration, Intravaginal Administration, Sublingual Adult Biological and medical sciences Childbirth & labor Clinical outcomes Clinical trials Comparative studies Customer satisfaction Drug therapy Female Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics Humans Labor, Induced - methods Labor, Induced - psychology Medical sciences Misoprostol Obstetrics Oxytocics Patient Satisfaction Pregnancy Pregnancy Outcome Quality of care route of administration |
title | A randomised comparison of patient satisfaction with vaginal and sublingual misoprostol for induction of labour at term |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-11T13%3A42%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20randomised%20comparison%20of%20patient%20satisfaction%20with%20vaginal%20and%20sublingual%20misoprostol%20for%20induction%20of%20labour%20at%20term&rft.jtitle=BJOG%20:%20an%20international%20journal%20of%20obstetrics%20and%20gynaecology&rft.au=Nassar,%20AH&rft.date=2007-10&rft.volume=114&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1215&rft.epage=1221&rft.pages=1215-1221&rft.issn=1470-0328&rft.eissn=1471-0528&rft.coden=BIOGFQ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01492.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E68290875%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=225581784&rft_id=info:pmid/17877674&rfr_iscdi=true |