Misoprostol Vaginal Insert versus Dinoprostone Vaginal Insert in the Induction of Labor
Advisor(s)
Jamie Hunsicker
Confirmation
1
Document Type
Poster
Location
McIntosh Activities Room
Start Date
19-4-2024 11:00 AM
End Date
19-4-2024 11:50 AM
Abstract
Problem: There is a continuous debate regarding the most efficient vaginal insert to use during induction of labor. Thus far, neither method has been shown to be more optimal than the other. The ideal method of how best to induce labor and ripen the cervix has yet to be identified.
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare effectiveness of misoprostol vaginal insert and dinoprostone vaginal insert in the induction of labor.
Methods: This project will be a retrospective quantitative analysis. Womens' charts who have received either the misoprostol vaginal insert or the dinoprostone vaginal insert will be reviewed. Outcomes such as induction delivery interval, occurrence of tachysystole, cost-effectiveness, additional oxytocin use, and cesarean section likelihood will be compared.
Conclusion: Most research supports both misoprostol and dinoprostone because they have similar safety profiles. Increased risk of cesarean section and tachysystole when using vaginal misoprostol was found in some studies. However, studies also show that misoprostol is more effective in cervical ripening, maternal satisfaction, shortening delivery time, reducing need for oxytocin, and cost-effective when compared to dinoprostone.
Recommended Citation
Rawson, Skye M., "Misoprostol Vaginal Insert versus Dinoprostone Vaginal Insert in the Induction of Labor" (2024). ONU Student Research Colloquium. 6.
https://digitalcommons.onu.edu/student_research_colloquium/2024/Posters/6
Level of Access
Open Access
Open Access
Available to all.
Misoprostol Vaginal Insert versus Dinoprostone Vaginal Insert in the Induction of Labor
McIntosh Activities Room
Problem: There is a continuous debate regarding the most efficient vaginal insert to use during induction of labor. Thus far, neither method has been shown to be more optimal than the other. The ideal method of how best to induce labor and ripen the cervix has yet to be identified.
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare effectiveness of misoprostol vaginal insert and dinoprostone vaginal insert in the induction of labor.
Methods: This project will be a retrospective quantitative analysis. Womens' charts who have received either the misoprostol vaginal insert or the dinoprostone vaginal insert will be reviewed. Outcomes such as induction delivery interval, occurrence of tachysystole, cost-effectiveness, additional oxytocin use, and cesarean section likelihood will be compared.
Conclusion: Most research supports both misoprostol and dinoprostone because they have similar safety profiles. Increased risk of cesarean section and tachysystole when using vaginal misoprostol was found in some studies. However, studies also show that misoprostol is more effective in cervical ripening, maternal satisfaction, shortening delivery time, reducing need for oxytocin, and cost-effective when compared to dinoprostone.