English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

1,4 Post Graduate, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2 Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology 3 Assistant Professor of Obstetrics and Gynecology Abstract Background: Misoprostol, a synthetic prostaglandin E1 analog, has been given both orally and vaginally for induction of labor at term. Due to the difference in pharmacokinetics of sublingual as compared to vaginally administered misoprostol, hence this study. Aim: To study Obstetric and Neonatal outcome of induction of labour with sublingual misoprostolas compared to intravaginal misoprostol. Method: 120 women with singleton pregnancy with no Cephalo-pelvic disproportion were randomized to receive Tab. Misoprostol 25mcg at 4 hour interval by vaginal route (60 patients) and sublingual route (60 patients). Results: With sublingual route of administration the number of doses of misoprostol used was significantly lower [p<0.05], reduced induction delivery interval [p<0.05], reduced pelvic examinations [p<0.05] when compared to vaginal route of administration. No difference in maternal and foetal complications.

Obstetric and Neonatal Outcome of Induction of Labour at term with Sublingual Misoprostol as Compared to Intravaginal Misoprostol