If you are seeing this message, you may be experiencing temporary network problems. Please wait a few minutes and refresh the page. If the problem persists, you may wish to report it to your local Network Manager.
It is also possible that your web browser is not configured or not able to display style sheets. In this case, although the visual presentation will be degraded, the site should continue to be functional. We recommend using the latest version of Microsoft or Mozilla web browser to help minimise these problems.
Wiley InterScience | ||
  Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica ScandinavicaVolume 82 Issue 12, Pages 1103 - 1106 Published Online: 5 Nov 2003 Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 2005
Abstract | References | Full Text: HTML, PDF (Size: 59K) | Related Articles | Citation Tracking  Original Article Oral misoprostol (100 μg) versus vaginal misoprostol (25 μg) in term labor induction: a randomized comparison Copyright Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 2003 KEYWORDS oral misoprostol • vaginal misoprostol • labor induction at term ABSTRACTObjective. To compare the efficacy of vaginal misoprostol (25 μg) to oral misoprostol (100 μg) in labor induction at term. Methods. One hundred and one women at term, with indications for labor induction and cervical Bishop's scores of less than 8, were randomly assigned to receive 100 μg of oral misoprostol or 25 μg vaginal misoprostol after random allocation. This could be repeated every 4 h to a maximum of five doses. The number delivering vaginally within 24 h of the induction was the main outcome measure. Results. Of those who delivered vaginally (74.5% in the oral group vs. 72% in the vaginal group), significantly fewer women delivered within 24 h of induction in the oral group (42.1% vs. 72.2%, RR 0.6, 95% CI 0.4–0.9), with more women receiving more than one dose (45.7% vs. 16.7%, RR 2.7, 95% CI 1.2–6.0). More women in the oral group received oxytocin (68.6% vs. 44%, RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1–2.2), and the induction to delivery interval was shorter in the vaginal group, although this was not statistically significant [28.9 h (SD 20.2) vs. 20.6 h (SD 16.1), mean difference − 8.3 h, 95% CI − 16.8 to 0.2]. There were no differences in the modes of delivery, uterine hyperstimulation rates or in the neonatal outcomes. Conclusion. Vaginal misoprostol in its currently recommended dose of 25 μg seems to be more efficacious than the 100 μg oral dose.
Submitted 17 March, 2003
|  |
