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.


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
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

537

Subventions

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

Auteurs

Hillary Bracken (H)

Gynuity Health Projects, 220 East 42nd Street, Suite 710, New York, NY, 10017, USA.

Kate Lightly (K)

Department of Women's and Children's Health, Liverpool Women's Hospital, University of Liverpool, Crown Street, Liverpool, L8 7SS, UK.

Shuchita Mundle (S)

Obstetrics and Gynecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Plot no 2, Sector 20, Mihan, Nagpur, 441108, India.

Robbie Kerr (R)

Fetal Medicine, St Michael's Hospital, Marlborough Street, BS1 3NU, Bristol, UK.

Brian Faragher (B)

Medical Statistics, LSTM Clinical Group, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool, L3 5QA, UK.

Thomas Easterling (T)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, 98195, USA.

Simon Leigh (S)

Nexus Clinical Analytics, Ltd, 15 Glencroft, Euxton, PR7 6BX, Lancashire, UK.

Mark Turner (M)

Department of Women's and Children's Health, Liverpool Women's Hospital, University of Liverpool, Crown Street, Liverpool, L8 7SS, UK.

Zarko Alfirevic (Z)

Department of Women's and Children's Health, Liverpool Women's Hospital, University of Liverpool, Crown Street, Liverpool, L8 7SS, UK.

Beverly Winikoff (B)

Gynuity Health Projects, 220 East 42nd Street, Suite 710, New York, NY, 10017, USA.

Andrew Weeks (A)

Department of Women's and Children's Health, Liverpool Women's Hospital, University of Liverpool, Crown Street, Liverpool, L8 7SS, UK. aweeks@liverpool.ac.uk.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH