Oral Misoprostol alone versus oral misoprostol followed by oxytocin for labour induction in women with hypertension in pregnancy (MOLI): protocol for a randomised controlled trial.
Administration, Intravenous
Administration, Oral
Clinical Protocols
Female
Hospitals
Humans
Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced
India
Labor, Induced
/ methods
Misoprostol
/ administration & dosage
Oxytocics
/ administration & dosage
Oxytocin
/ administration & dosage
Pragmatic Clinical Trials as Topic
Pregnancy
Treatment Outcome
Augmentation of labour
Induction of labour
Misoprostol
Oxytocin
Pre-eclampsia
Randomized controlled trial
Study protocol
Journal
BMC pregnancy and childbirth
ISSN: 1471-2393
Titre abrégé: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967799
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Jul 2021
29 Jul 2021
Historique:
received:
25
06
2021
accepted:
19
07
2021
entrez:
30
7
2021
pubmed:
31
7
2021
medline:
18
11
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Every 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. This 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. Avoiding 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. Clinical Trials.gov, NCT03749902 , registered on 21
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Every 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.
METHODS
METHODS
This 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.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
Avoiding 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 REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
Clinical Trials.gov, NCT03749902 , registered on 21
Identifiants
pubmed: 34325670
doi: 10.1186/s12884-021-04009-8
pii: 10.1186/s12884-021-04009-8
pmc: PMC8320158
doi:
Substances chimiques
Oxytocics
0
Misoprostol
0E43V0BB57
Oxytocin
50-56-6
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03749902']
Types de publication
Clinical Trial Protocol
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
537Subventions
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : G1100686
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/R006180/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/R006/1801
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Jun 22;6:CD014484
pubmed: 34155622
BMJ. 2015 Feb 05;350:h217
pubmed: 25656228
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008 Dec 02;6:107
pubmed: 19055710
Lancet. 2014 Sep 13;384(9947):980-1004
pubmed: 24797575
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003 Jan;188(1):162-7
pubmed: 12548212
Lancet. 2017 Aug 12;390(10095):669-680
pubmed: 28668289
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015 Nov 18;15:100
pubmed: 26582386
S Afr Med J. 2003 May;93(5):375-9
pubmed: 12830603
Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Jun;57(2):331-42
pubmed: 24785419
BJOG. 2018 Dec;125(13):1673-1680
pubmed: 29981523
Birth. 2019 Sep;46(3):400-410
pubmed: 30561053
Biometrics. 1979 Sep;35(3):549-56
pubmed: 497341
BJOG. 2001 Sep;108(9):952-9
pubmed: 11563466