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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology 2007-10, Vol.114 (10), p.1215-1221
Hauptverfasser: Nassar, AH, Awwad, J, Khalil, AM, Abu‐Musa, A, Mehio, G, Usta, IM
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 &amp; 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&amp;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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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