User Guide
Why can I only view 3 results?
You can also view all results when you are connected from the network of member institutions only. For non-member institutions, we are opening a 1-month free trial version if institution officials apply.
So many results that aren't mine?
References in many bibliographies are sometimes referred to as "Surname, I", so the citations of academics whose Surname and initials are the same may occasionally interfere. This problem is often the case with citation indexes all over the world.
How can I see only citations to my article?
After searching the name of your article, you can see the references to the article you selected as soon as you click on the details section.
 Views 11
 Downloands 4
Oral misoprostol versus dinoprostone vaginal tablets for labor induction
2013
Journal:  
Cukurova Medical Journal
Author:  
Abstract:

Purpose: Induction of labour is common in obstetric practice. We conducted this study to find the appropriate and safe drug for labour induction and to compare the safety and efficacy of oral misoprostol and vaginal dinoprostone for labour induction. Material and Methods: In a provisional, prospective and cross-sectional study, one hundred and fifty five singleton cephalic presentation full term pregnancies with medical or obstetric indication for labour induction were allocated in two groups. First group received oral 50 micrograms for nulliparas and low parity group (1-4), and 25micrograms for grand multiparas (≥ 5) misoprostol orally every 6 hours to a maximum of four doses daily. In the second group vaginal tablets of dinoprostone 3mg then 1.5mg for nulliparas and 1.5mg for low parity and grand multiparas groups were inserted in the posterior fornix, every 8 hours. Primary outcome measures were: induction success, induction-delivery interval and number of used doses. Secondary outcome measures included: maternal side effects, caesarean section rate, mode of delivery and neonatal outcome. Data was collected from patient case notes and analyzed using software SPSS (version 13.0) and p-value < 0.05 was used as statistical significance of differences. Results: In our study there were no significant differences in baseline parameters in the two groups nor in the indications for labor induction except misoprostol was used in premature rupture of membrane. Induction of labor succeeded in 123 (79.35%) women without other interventions from other methods (80.26% misoprostol group versus 78.5% dinoprostone p=0.492). It was observed that there were no significant differences between the two groups in final outcomes nor in obstetrical complications. There was no significance in differences between misoprostol and dinoprostone groups in induction-delivery interval (15.2 ± 14.5 hours versus 16.4 ± 11.3 hours p=0.6 resp.). Conclusion: This study demonstrated that oral misoprostol is as effective as vaginal dinoprostone tablets for induction of labor and can be a good alternative for this purpose.

Keywords:

Citation Owners
Information: There is no ciation to this publication.
Similar Articles










Cukurova Medical Journal

Field :   Sağlık Bilimleri

Journal Type :   Uluslararası

Metrics
Article : 2.296
Cite : 1.845
2023 Impact : 0.075
Cukurova Medical Journal