n South African Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology - Labour induction at term - a randomised trial comparing Foley catheter plus titrated oral misoprostol solution, titrated oral misoprostol solution alone, and dinoprostone
|Article Title||Labour induction at term - a randomised trial comparing Foley catheter plus titrated oral misoprostol solution, titrated oral misoprostol solution alone, and dinoprostone|
|© Publisher:||Health and Medical Publishing Group (HMPG)|
|Journal||South African Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology|
|Author||Baron B. Matonhodze, G. Justus Hofmeyr and Jonathan Levin|
|Publication Date||Jun 2003|
|Pages||40 - 45|
<I>Objectives.</I> To compare three methods of labour induction. <br><I>Design.</I> Randomised controlled trial. <br><I>Setting</I>. Academic hospitals in Johannesburg, South Africa. <br><I>Subjects</I>. Women with intact membranes due for induction of labour. <br><I>Method.</I> Randomised, sealed opaque envelopes were used to allocate women to labour induction with extra-amniotic Foley catheter / titrated oral misoprostol solution (N = 174), titrated oral misoprostol solution alone (N = 176), or vaginal dinoprostone (N = 176). Misoprostol was dissolved in water and 20 - 40 g was given 2-hourly. <br><I>Outcome measures.</I> These were failure to deliver vaginally within 24 hours, additional measures for induction or augmentation of labour, analgesia, and maternal and fetal complications. <br><I>Results.</I> In the Foley catheter group, misoprostol was required in all but 1 case. Failure to deliver vaginally within 24 hours was similar for the three groups (79/174 v. 70/176 v. 70/176 respectively). Labour augmentation, caesarean section and instrumental delivery were used somewhat more frequently in the Foley / misoprostol group than in the misoprostol alone group, but these differences were not statistically significant. More analgesia was used in the Foley catheter / misoprostol group than in the misoprostol group (64/172 v. 46/175). Sideeffects and neonatal complications were similar for the three groups. <br><I>Conclusions.</I> Use of extra-amniotic Foley catheter placement showed no measurable benefits over the use of oral misoprostol alone, or vaginal dinoprostone.
Article metrics loading...