Dataset Information

Survey of Provider Preferences Regarding the Route of Misoprostol for Induction of Labor at Term.

ABSTRACT: Objective ?To survey obstetrical provider preferences regarding use of misoprostol for induction of labor (IOL). Methods ?An anonymous 25-question survey was distributed at an American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) joint District V and VII Meeting in 2014 to obstetrics providers. The same survey was sent electronically to local providers. A separate survey was emailed to the labor and delivery nurses at two of the teaching hospitals in Indianapolis. The surveys queried provider demographics, dosing practice for misoprostol, opinions regarding different dosing strategies, and instructions on buccal administration. Results ?A total of 113 (46.5%) providers responded. Of these, 92.9% used misoprostol for IOL, 73% preferred the vaginal route, 20% preferred buccal administration, and 7% oral administration. Only resident physician and midwife providers endorsed buccal route preference. Being a midwife independently predicted a preference for using buccal misoprostol (odds ratio [OR]: 125.8, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.9-1992.3). Additionally, 44 nurses completed the survey regarding administration techniques of buccal misoprostol. Also, 54.5% of nurses correctly instructed their patients on buccal administration techniques. Conclusion ?Although not extensively studied, one-fifth of providers, particularly nurse midwives, prefer buccal administration of misoprostol for IOL. The majority of nurses correctly administered buccal misoprostol. There may be a need for further study and education about buccal administration of misoprostol for IOL.

SUBMITTER: Towns R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5526707 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Survey of Provider Preferences Regarding the Route of Misoprostol for Induction of Labor at Term.

Towns Rachel R Quinney Sara K SK Pierson Rebecca C RC Haas David M DM

AJP reports 20170725 3

<b>Objective</b> To survey obstetrical provider preferences regarding use of misoprostol for induction of labor (IOL). <b>Methods</b> An anonymous 25-question survey was distributed at an American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) joint District V and VII Meeting in 2014 to obstetrics providers. The same survey was sent electronically to local providers. A separate survey was emailed to the labor and delivery nurses at two of the teaching hospitals in Indianapolis. The surveys ...[more]

PMID: 28752015

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate whether cervical ripening with oral misoprostol increases cesarean delivery risk and prolongs time to vaginal delivery compared with vaginal misoprostol in a predominantly overweight population.MethodsThis single center, retrospective cohort study was performed at a tertiary care academic medical center and compared labor induction outcomes with vaginal misoprostol to outcomes with oral misoprostol after a complete institutional shift to oral misoprostol. Labor induction using 25 micrograms vaginal misoprostol in 2013-2014 was compared with 50 micrograms oral misoprostol in 2014-2015. The primary outcome was cesarean delivery. Secondary outcomes included time to vaginal delivery, uterine tachysystole, maternal hemorrhage, and composite adverse neonatal outcomes. Demographics and outcomes were analyzed using standard statistical tests. Multivariable regression models accounting for potential confounders were created for the primary and secondary outcomes with adjusted odds ratios (aOR) as the measures of effect.ResultsThere were 138 women in the oral and 138 women in the vaginal misoprostol groups. In the overall cohort, the median (interquartile range) body mass index was 31.7 (28.2-36.8) and most women (72%) were of either black or Hispanic race or ethnicity. The frequency of cesarean delivery was higher in the oral than the vaginal misoprostol group (32% vs 21%; P=.04). The adjusted odds of cesarean was higher with oral misoprostol (aOR 2.01; 95% CI 1.07-3.76). Among nulliparous women, the frequency of cesarean delivery was 41% in the oral and 28% in the vaginal misoprostol groups (aOR 2.79; 95% CI 1.26-6.19). Women had a longer time to vaginal delivery in the oral compared with vaginal misoprostol group (41 vs 31 hours respectively, P=.01). Tachysystole occurred more frequently with vaginal misoprostol (20% vs 11%; P=.04).ConclusionCompared with vaginal misoprostol, oral misoprostol may be associated with increased risk of cesarean delivery and longer time to vaginal delivery.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Induction of labor occurs in greater than 22% of all pregnancies in the United States. Previous studies have shown that misoprostol is more effective for induction than oxytocin or dinoprostone alone. The World Health Organization recommends vaginal misoprostol 25mcg every 6 hours and the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends 25mcg vaginal misoprostol every three to 6 hours. Although route of administration and dosage of misoprostol has been extensively studied, little is known about the optimal dosing interval of vaginal misoprostol. METHODS:The primary objective of this study is to determine the effect of delayed vaginal misoprostol dosing, defined as any interval longer than 4.5 h, on time to vaginal delivery. Our hypothesis is that the routine dosing interval of 4 hours shortens times to vaginal delivery compared to delayed dosing, even when adjusted for the time of delay. Secondary objectives include the effect of delayed vaginal misoprostol dosing on cesarean section rate, operative vaginal delivery rate, maternal outcomes, and neonatal outcomes. We conducted a retrospective chart review of 323 inductions of labor at one academic institution. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who achieved a vaginal delivery within 24 h. The group who received all doses of misoprostol within a 4.5 h dosing window (Routine Dosing Interval Group) was compared with the group who had any dosing deviation (Delayed Dosing Interval Group). RESULTS:Of 133 included patients, 64 subjects received routine interval dosing and 69 subjects received delayed interval dosing. The vaginal delivery rates within 24 h were 56% (36/64) and 20% (14/69), respectively (P < 10- 4). Spontaneous vaginal delivery rates were 86% (55/64) vs. 75% (52/69), respectively (P = .13). Kaplan Meier curves demonstrated statistically significant difference in time to vaginal delivery between groups, with a Cox Proportional Hazard ratio for routine dosing interval of 1.73 (P < 10- 5) unadjusted and 1.34 (P = .01) when adjusted for dosing delay. CONCLUSIONS:This retrospective study demonstrates a significant increase in delay-adjusted time to vaginal delivery when doses of vaginal misoprostol are delayed past 4.5 h.

Project description:BackgroundThe Induction of labor is the most common obstetric procedure in daily practice. Introducing propranolol as a new drug to augment the action of prostaglandins will help in the induction process and decrease CS rates. Several researchers have used propranolol in the augmentation of labor.AimThis pilot study compares propranolol and misoprostol versus misoprostol alone for labor induction in primigravids.MethodsThis is a Randomized clinical trial, single-blinded, placebo-controlled trial at Ain Shams University Maternity hospital. This study included 128 pregnant full-term primigravid women candidates for labor induction, randomized into two groups. All candidates underwent labor induction with 25 µg of vaginal misoprostol. Group I received 20 mg of oral propranolol tablets, while group II received sugary pills as a placebo. Candidates who responded successfully to induction were assessed for possible augmentation of labor by amniotomy or oxytocin infusion. The Primary outcome was induction to delivery interval, while the secondary outcomes were the duration of the latent phase, mode of delivery, and APGAR score of the neonate.ResultsThe induction-delivery time was (11.8 ± 8.1 h. vs. 12.6 ± 8.9 h., P value = 0.027) and the duration of the latent phase of labor (7.9 ± 5.6 h. vs. 9.2 ± 6.03 h., P value = 0.017) were significantly shorter in the group of misoprostol and propranolol compared to the group of misoprostol and placebo. There was no statistically significant difference between both groups' mode of delivery, indications for cesarean section, misoprostol, and oxytocin doses, or neonatal outcome. (P value > 0.05).ConclusionPropranolol, when used with misoprostol for induction of labor, results in augmentation of action of misoprostol and a significantly shorter induction-delivery interval.Trial registrationWe retrospectively registered this trial in clinicaltrial.gov on 01/09/2020 (NCT04533841). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04533841.

Project description:BackgroundThe safest, most effective and fastest combined approaches to induction of labor is unknown. In an open-label randomized clinical trial we evaluated the efficacy of combination of extra-amniotic Foley's catheter and vaginal misoprostol compared to vaginal misoprostol alone for cervical ripening and induction of labor on the incidence of failed induction, induction-to-delivery interval and adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes.MethodsPregnant women at gestational age of 28 weeks or greater admitted at Kenyatta National Hospital, Kenya for induction of labor were enrolled then randomized to either a combination of extra-amniotic Foley's catheter inflated by 30 cm3 of normal saline and 25 micrograms of vaginal misoprostol or 25 micrograms of vaginal misoprostol alone. Women underwent 6 hourly reviews and additional misoprostol inserted if required. The primary outcome was incidence of failed induction. Secondary outcomes were induction-to-delivery interval and adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes. We conducted an intent-to-treat analysis and compared means or medians using t-test or Wilcoxon rank, proportions using Chi-square or Fishers test as appropriate. Induction-to-delivery interval were compared using the log-rank test. P-values of < 0.05 and 95% confidence intervals that excluded the null were considered statistically significant.ResultsBetween February and May 2016, we enrolled 180 of 237 pregnant women admitted for induction of labor and randomized them to either a combination of extra-amniotic Foley's catheter and vaginal misoprostol (n = 90) or vaginal misoprostol alone (n = 90). The socio-demographic and obstetric characteristics were similar between the two groups. Failed induction rates were lower but not statistically significant following combined extra-amniotic Foley's catheter and vaginal misoprostol (8.9%) versus vaginal misoprostol alone (11.1%). The mean induction-to-delivery time was 4.8 h shorter in the combined extra-amniotic Foley's catheter and vaginal misoprostol (mean 18.9, standard deviation (SD) 7.2 h) compared to misoprostol only group (mean 14.1, SD 6.9 h) (log-rank test, p < 0.001). Maternal and perinatal complications were similar between the two groups.ConclusionsExtra-amniotic Foley's catheter and vaginal misoprostol for cervical ripening and induction of labor did not significantly lower the incidence of failed induction but safely shortened induction-to-delivery time compared to vaginal misoprostol only.Trial registrationTrial was retrospectively registered on 14-03-2016 PACTR201604001535825.

Project description:BackgroundLabor induction is defined as any procedure that stimulates uterine contractions before labor begins spontaneously. The vaginal and oral routes of administration of misoprostol are those most used for the induction of labor in routine practice, with the recommended dose being 25 μg. Nevertheless, the sublingual route may reduce the number of vaginal examinations required, increasing patient comfort and lowering the risk of maternal and fetal infection. Based on a previous systematic review, the objective of this study was to compare the frequency of tachysystole as the main outcome measure when misoprostol is administered sublingually at the dose of 12.5 μg versus vaginally at a dose of 25 μg to induce labor in a full-term pregnancy with a live fetus.MethodsA randomized, placebo-controlled, triple-blind clinical trial was conducted at two maternity hospitals in northeastern Brazil. Two hundred patients with a full-term pregnancy, a live fetus, Bishop score ≤ 6 and an indication for induction of labor were included. Following randomization, one group received 12.5 μg misoprostol sublingually and a vaginal placebo, while the other group received a sublingual placebo and 25 μg misoprostol vaginally. The primary outcome was the frequency of tachysystole. Student's t-test, the chi-square test of association and Fisher's exact test were used, as appropriate. Risk ratios and their 95% confidence intervals were calculated.ResultsThe frequency of tachysystole was lower in the group using 12.5 μg misoprostol sublingually compared to the group using 25 μg misoprostol vaginally (RR = 0.15; 95%CI: 0.02-0.97; p = 0.002). Failure to achieve vaginal delivery within 12 and 24 h was similar in both groups. Sublingual administration was preferred to vaginal administration by women in both groups; however, the difference was not statistically significant.ConclusionThe effectiveness of labor induction with low-dose sublingual misoprostol was similar to that achieved with vaginal administration of the recommended dose; however, the rate of tachysystole was lower in the sublingual group, and this route of administration may prove a safe alternative.Trial registrationRegistration number: NCT01406392, ClinicalTrials.gov. Date of registration: August 1, 2011.

Dataset Information

Survey of Provider Preferences Regarding the Route of Misoprostol for Induction of Labor at Term.

Publications

Survey of Provider Preferences Regarding the Route of Misoprostol for Induction of Labor at Term.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets