The Induction with Foley OR Misoprostol (INFORM) Study dataset. A dataset of 602 women with hypertensive disease in pregnancy, in India, randomised to either Foley catheter or oral misoprostol for induction of labour.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objectives
Induction of labour (IOL), or starting labour artificially, can be a lifesaving intervention for pregnant women and their babies, and rates are rising significantly globally. As rates increase, it becomes increasingly important to fully evaluate all available data, especially that from low income settings where the potential benefits and harms are greater. The goal of this paper is to describe the datasets collected as part of the Induction with Foley OR Misoprostol (INFORM) Study, a randomised trial comparing two of the recommended methods of cervical ripening for labour induction, oral misoprostol and Foley catheter, in women being induced for hypertension in pregnancy, at two sites in India during 2013-15.Data description
This dataset includes comprehensive data on 602 women who underwent IOL for hypertensive disorders in pregnancy. Women were randomly assigned to cervical ripening with oral misoprostol or a transcervical Foley catheter in two government hospitals in India. The main dataset has 367 variables including monitoring during the induction of labour, medications administered, timing and mode of delivery, measures of neonatal morbidity and mortality, maternal mortality and morbidity, maternal satisfaction and health economic data. The dataset is anonymised and available on ReShare.
SUBMITTER: Mundle S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8434713 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To determine the effectiveness and economic impact of two methods for induction of labour in hypertensive women, in low-resource settings. DESIGN:Cost-consequence analysis of a previously reported multicentre, parallel, open-label randomised trial. SETTING & POPULATION:A total of 602 women with a live fetus, aged ?18 years requiring delivery for pre-eclampsia or hypertension, in two public hospitals in Nagpur, India. METHODS:We performed a formal economic evaluation alongside the INFORM clinical trial. Women were randomised to receive transcervical Foley catheterisation or oral misoprostol 25 mcg. Healthcare expenditure was calculated using a provider-side microcosting approach. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Rates of vaginal this delivery within 24 hours of induction, healthcare expenditure per completed treatment episode. RESULTS:Induction with oral misoprostol resulted in a (mean difference) $20.6USD reduction in healthcare expenditure [95% CI (-) $123.59 (-) $72.49], and improved achievement of vaginal delivery within 24 hours of induction, mean difference 10% [95% CI (-2 to 17.9%), P = 0.016]. Oxytocin administration time was reduced by 135.3 minutes [95% CI (84.4-186.2 minutes), P < 0.01] and caesarean sections by 9.1% [95% CI (1.1-17%), P = 0.025] for those receiving oral misoprostol. Following probabilistic sensitivity analysis, oral misoprostol was cost-saving in 63% of 5,000 bootstrap replications and achieved superior rates of vaginal delivery, delivery within 24 hours of induction and vaginal delivery within 24 hours of induction in 98.7%, 90.7%, and 99.4% of bootstrap simulations. Based on univariate threshold analysis, the unit price of oral misoprostol 25 mcg could feasibly increase 31-fold from $0.24 to $7.50 per 25 mcg tablet and remain cost-saving. CONCLUSION:Compared to Foley catheterisation for the induction of high-risk hypertensive women, oral misoprostol improves rates of vaginal delivery within 24 hours of induction and may also reduce costs. Additional research performed in other low-resource settings is required to determine their relative cost-effectiveness. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT:Oral misoprostol less costly and more effective than Foley catheter for labour induction in hypertension.
| S-EPMC6282740 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Between 40,000 and 80,000 pregnant women die annually from pre-eclampsia and eclampsia. Although magnesium sulphate and anti-hypertensive therapies can reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with pre-eclampsia, the only cure comes with delivery. Prompt delivery of the baby, preferably by vaginal route, is vital in order to achieve good maternal and neonatal outcomes. Induction of labour is therefore a critical intervention in order to prevent morbidity to both mother and baby. Two low cost interventions - oral misoprostol tablets and transcervical Foley catheterization - are already used by some in low resource settings, but their relative risks and benefits are not known. The trial will compare the risks, benefits, and trade-offs in efficacy, safety, acceptability and cost of misoprostol and Foley catheter for induction in women with preeclampsia or uncontrolled hypertension. METHODS/DESIGN:A total of 602 women with an ongoing pregnancy with a live fetus requiring delivery because of pre-eclampsia or uncontrolled hypertension will be randomly assigned to labor induction with a transcervical Foley catheter or oral misoprostol 25 micrograms. Women will be recruited at two hospitals in Nagpur, India. The misoprostol group will receive oral misoprostol 25 microgram every 2 hours for a maximum of 12 doses or until active labor commences. The Foley group will undergo induction using a Foley catheter (silicone, size 18 F with 30 ml balloon) which will remain until active labor starts, the Foley catheter falls out, or 12 hours have elapsed. The primary outcome will be the attainment of vaginal delivery within 24 hours. Providers administering the treatment and those assessing the outcomes will not be blinded to group assignment. TRIAL REGISTRATION:NCT01801410 (ClinicalTrials.gov).
| S-EPMC4261642 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInduction of labour (IOL) is one of the commonest obstetric interventions, with significant impact on both the individual woman and health service delivery. Outpatient IOL is an attractive option to reduce these impacts. To date there is little data comparing outpatient and inpatient IOL methods, and potential safety concerns (hyperstimulation) if prostaglandins, the standard inpatient IOL medications, are used in the outpatient setting. The purpose of this study was to assess feasibility, clinical effectiveness and patient acceptability of outpatient Foley catheter (OPC) vs. inpatient vaginal PGE2 (IP) for induction of labour (IOL) at term.MethodsWomen with an unfavourable cervix requiring IOL at term (N=101) were randomised to outpatient care using Foley catheter (OPC, n=50) or inpatient care using vaginal PGE2 (IP, n=51). OPC group had Foley catheter inserted and were discharged overnight following a reassuring cardiotocograph. IP group received 2 mg/1 mg vaginal PGE2 if nulliparous or 1 mg/1 mg if multiparous. Main outcome measures were inpatient stay (prior to birth, in Birthing Unit, total), mode of birth, induction to delivery interval, adverse reactions and patient satisfaction.ResultsOPC group had shorter hospital stay prior to birth (21.3 vs. 32.4 hrs, p< .001), IP were more likely to achieve vaginal birth within 12 hours of presenting to Birthing Unit (53% vs. 28%, p= .01). Vaginal birth rates (66% OPC Vs. 71% IP), total induction to delivery time (33.5 hrs vs. 31.3 hrs) and total inpatient times (96 hrs OPC Vs. 105 hrs IP) were similar. OPC group felt less pain (significant discomfort 26% Vs 58%, p=.003), and had more sleep (5.8 Vs 3.4 hours, p< .001), during cervical preparation, but were more likely to require oxytocin IOL (88 Vs 59%, p=.001).ConclusionsOPC was feasible and acceptable for IOL of women with an unfavourable cervix at term compared to IP, however did not show a statistically significant reduction in total inpatient stay and was associated with increased oxytocin IOL.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN:12609000420246.
| S-EPMC3564932 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Currently, there is no meta-analysis comparing intravaginal misoprostol plus intracervical Foley catheter versus intravaginal misoprostol alone for term pregnancy without identifying risk factors. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing concurrent intravaginal misoprostol and intracervical Foley catheter versus intravaginal misoprostol alone for cervical ripening. We systematically searched Embase, Pubmed, and Cochrane Collaboration databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intracervical Foley catheter plus intravaginal misoprostol and intravaginal misoprostol alone using the search terms "Foley", "misoprostol", "cervical ripening", and "induction" up to 29 January 2019. Data were extracted and analyzed by two independent reviewers including study characteristics, induction time, cesarean section (C/S), clinical suspicion of chorioamnionitis, uterine tachysystole, meconium stain, and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admissions. Data was pooled using random effects modeling and calculated with risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Pooled analysis from eight studies, including 1110 women, showed that labor induction using a combination of intracervical Foley catheter and intravaginal misoprostol decreased induction time by 2.71 h (95% CI -4.33 to -1.08, p = 0.001), as well as the risk of uterine tachysystole and meconium staining (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.30-0.99 and RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.32-0.73, respectively) significantly compared to those using intravaginal misoprostol alone. However, there was no difference in C/S rate (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.78-1.11) or clinical suspicion of chorioamnionitis rate (RR 1.22, CI 0.58-2.57) between the two groups. Labor induction with a combination of intracervical Foley catheter and intravaginal misoprostol may be a better choice based on advantages in shortening induction time and reducing the risk of uterine tachysystole and meconium staining compared to intravaginal misoprostol alone.
| S-EPMC7143495 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Misoprostol in oral or vaginal form is an established method of labour induction worldwide. Its use after previous caesarean section is associated with a high rate of uterine rupture; according to international guidelines it is therefore contraindicated in this setting. However the evidence base for this recommendation comprises case reports, one randomised trial that was discontinued prematurely, and numerous low quality retrospective data analyses published between 1997 and 2004. New insights into e.g. resorption kinetics, dosage and application intervals, dose dependant uterine hyperstimulation rates, as well as increasing clinical experience with misoprostol have lead to a critical reappraisal of these "historical" studies. Accordingly the evidence supporting a ban on vaginal and particularly oral misoprostol for labour induction in the context of a scarred uterus is currently insufficient for a convincing guideline recommendation. In view of the clear advantages of misoprostol over prostaglandin E2 (cheaper, more effective) a retrospective review of registry data should be conducted to determine the incidence of uterine rupture following misoprostol and the circumstances in which it occurs. A prospective, randomised trial could then be conducted on the basis of these findings (e.g. oral misoprostol vs. vaginal prostaglandin E2); known risk factors for uterine rupture including the type of uterine scar would need to be taken into account when selecting patients for vaginal delivery. Until new data from well-designed studies are available, misoprostol will continue to be contraindicated in clinical guidelines for use in labour induction after previous caesarean section.
| S-EPMC4678051 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study aimed to determine the optimal Foley catheter balloon volume (30-mL vs. 80-mL) and the maximum time for cervical ripening (12 hours vs. 24 hours) to improve vaginal delivery rate within 24 hours of induction.We conducted an open-label, randomized controlled trial in a teaching hospital in China. Women with a term singleton pregnancy, cephalic presentation, intact membrane and an unfavorable cervix (Bishop score <6) were randomly allocated, in 1:1:1:1 ratio, to receive either one of the four treatments: (1) 30-mL balloon for a maximum of 12 hours, (2) 30-mL balloon for a maximum of 24 hours, (3) 80-mL balloon for a maximum of 12 hours, and (4) 80-mL balloon for a maximum of 24 hours. The primary outcome was vaginal delivery within 24 hours. Secondary outcomes included cesarean section rate and maternal/neonatal morbidity. Data were analyzed on a per-protocol basis.Five hundred and four women were recruited and randomized (126 women in each group); nine women did not receive the assigned intervention. More women achieved vaginal delivery within 24 hours in 12-hour Foley catheter groups than in the 24-hour Foley catheter groups (30-mL/12 hours: 54.5%, 30-mL/24 hours: 33.1%, 80-mL/12 hours: 46.4%, 80-mL/24 hours: 24.0%, p < 0.001). Cesarean section rates and the incidence of chorioaminonitis were comparable among four groups. After adjustment for confounding factors, both ripening time and balloon size did not affect the proportion of women delivered vaginally within 24 hours of induction.For women with an unfavorable cervix at term, induction of labor with a Foley catheter is safe and effective. Higher balloon volume (80-mL vs. 30-mL) and longer ripening time (24 hours vs. 12 hours) would not shorten induction to delivery interval or reduce cesarean section rate.Chinese Clinical trial registry (ChiCTR-TRC-13003044).
| S-EPMC4556187 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEvery year approximately 30,000 women die from hypertensive disease in pregnancy. Magnesium sulphate and anti-hypertensives reduce morbidity, but delivery is the only cure. Low dose oral misoprostol, a prostaglandin E1 analogue, is a highly effective method for labour induction. Usually, once active labour has commenced, the misoprostol is replaced with an intravenous oxytocin infusion if ongoing stimulation is required. However, some studies have shown that oral misoprostol can be continued into active labour, a simpler and potentially more acceptable protocol for women. To date, these two protocols have never been directly compared.MethodsThis pragmatic, open-label, randomised trial will compare a misoprostol alone labour induction protocol with the standard misoprostol plus oxytocin protocol in three Indian hospitals. The study will recruit 520 pregnant women being induced for hypertensive disease in pregnancy and requiring augmentation after membrane rupture. Participants will be randomised to receive either further oral misoprostol 25mcg every 2 h, or titrated intravenous oxytocin. The primary outcome will be caesarean birth. Secondary outcomes will assess the efficacy of the induction process, maternal and fetal/neonatal complications and patient acceptability. This protocol (version 1.04) adheres to the SPIRIT checklist. A cost-effectiveness analysis, situational analysis and formal qualitative assessment of women's experience are also planned.DiscussionAvoiding oxytocin and continuing low dose misoprostol into active labour may have a number of benefits for both women and the health care system. Misoprostol is heat stable, oral medication and thus easy to store, transport and administer; qualities particularly desirable in low resource settings. An oral medication protocol requires less equipment (e.g. electronic infusion pumps) and may free up health care providers to assist with other aspects of the woman's care. The simplicity of the protocol may also help to reduce human errors associated with the delivery of intravenous infusions. Finally, women may prefer to be mobile during labour and not restricted by an intravenous infusion. There is a need, therefore, to assess whether augmentation using oral misoprostol is superior clinically and economically to the standard protocol of intravenous oxytocin.Trial registrationClinical Trials.gov, NCT03749902 , registered on 21st Nov 2018.
| S-EPMC8320158 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Prevention of catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI), a leading cause of nosocomial disease, is complicated by the propensity of bacteria to form biofilms on indwelling medical devices [1,2,3,4,5]. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:To better understand the microbial diversity of these communities, we report the results of a culture-independent bacterial survey of Foley urinary catheters obtained from patients following total prostatectomy. Two patient subsets were analyzed, based on treatment or no treatment with systemic fluoroquinolone antibiotics during convalescence. Results indicate the presence of diverse polymicrobial assemblages that were most commonly observed in patients who did not receive systemic antibiotics. The communities typically contained both Gram-positive and Gram-negative microorganisms that included multiple potential pathogens. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE:Prevention and treatment of CAUTI must take into consideration the possible polymicrobial nature of any particular infection.
| S-EPMC2771765 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThis online survey looked at the experiences and general perceptions of midwives concerning induction of labour and the specific use of misoprostol.MethodsWe published an online questionnaire with 24 questions in German on midwives' experiences and perceptions of different methods of induction of labour.ResultsThe online survey was answered by 412 midwives between February 2016 and February 2017. At least 20% of the 24 questions were answered in 333 questionnaires, which were included in this analysis. Oral misoprostol was the most common induction method for primipara and for women with a previous vaginal birth and an unfavourable cervix. Apart from alternative methods for induction of labour like castor oil and complementary/alternative methods, oral misoprostol was the preferred method of induction of labour by midwives. Midwives described a wide range of dosage schedules concerning application intervals, starting doses, and the maximum daily dose of misoprostol. Approximately 50% of the participants of this study described prescriptions of more than 200 µg misoprostol daily for induction of labour.ConclusionMisoprostol is widely used in Germany and was one of the three preferred methods of induction of labour among midwives in our study next to castor oil and complementary/alternative methods. The preparation and dosage of misoprostol vary significantly among hospitals and do not adhere to international guidelines. Midwives voiced their concerns about inconsistent indications and heterogenous use of different methods and dosages of induction. They wished for more patience with late-term pregnancies and individualized shared decision-making between pregnant women and obstetricians.
| S-EPMC8553731 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Induction of labor (IoL) is an increasingly common obstetric procedure. Foley catheter IoL is recommended by WHO. It is associated with the lowest rate of uterine hyperstimulation syndrome and similar duration to delivery and vaginal delivery rate compared to other methods. Insertion is typically via speculum but digital insertion has been reported to be faster, better tolerated and with similar universal insertion success compared to speculum insertion in a mixed population of nulliparas and multiparas. Transcervical procedure is more challenging in nulliparas and when the cervix is unripe. We evaluated the ease and tolerability of digital compared to speculum insertion of Foley catheter for induction of labor in nulliparas with unripe cervixes. METHODS:A randomized trial was performed in a university hospital in Malaysia. Participants were nulliparas at term with unripe cervixes (Bishop Score???5) admitted for IoL who were randomized to digital or speculum-aided transcervical Foley catheter insertion in lithotomy position. Primary outcomes were insertion duration, pain score [11-point Visual Numerical Rating Scale (VNRS)], and failure. All primary outcomes were recorded after the first insertion. RESULTS:Data from 86 participants were analysed. Insertion duration (with standard deviation) was 2.72?±?1.85 vs. 2.25?±?0.55?min p?=?0.12, pain score (VNRS) median [interquartile range] 3.5 [2-5] vs. 3 [2-5] p?=?0.72 and failure 2/42 (5%) vs. 0/44 (0%) p?=?0.24 for digital vs speculum respectively. There was no significant difference found between the two groups for all three primary outcomes. Induction to delivery 30.7?±?9.4 vs 29.6?±?11.5?h p?=?0.64, Cesarean section 25/60 (64%) vs 28/64 (60%) RR 0.9 95% CI p?=?0.7 and maternal satisfaction VNRS score with the birth process 7 [IQR 6-8] vs 7 [7-8] p?=?0.97 for digital vs. speculum arms respectively. Other labor, delivery and neonatal secondary outcomes were not significantly different. CONCLUSION:Digital and speculum insertion in nulliparas with unripe cervixes had similar insertion performance. As digital insertion required less equipment and consumables, it could be the preferred insertion method for the equally adept and the insertion technique to train towards. TRIAL REGISTRATION:This trial was registered with ISRCTN registration number 13804902 on 15 November 2017.
| S-EPMC7257160 | biostudies-literature