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/

Zendy Pro

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Presents AI Discovery search usage as a premium feature

AI Discovery

Presents AI Discovery explain and summary usage as a premium feature

Content Analysis

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

1500 Top-up

3000 Top-up

Zendy Basic

2500 Top-up

Zendy Unlimited

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

im:  To compare the effectiveness of oral misoprostol with vaginal misoprostol for induction of labour at or more than 40 weeks of pregnancy. Method:  Study design: Prospective comparative study. Duration: March 2005 to February 2006 (12 months)in the Dept of Obs/Gyn, TU Teaching Hospital, Kathmandu. Methods: Hundred nullipara (primi or gravida 2 with 1 spontaneous or induced abortion 40 but with Bishop's score fetal distress 11/15: 2/7 group B/, which was statistically significant. No significant difference was noted in the pre induction cervical score, number of doses, induction to active stage of labour, induction to delivery time, use of oxytocin, failed induction and Apgar scores. Conclusion:  Oral misoprostol found to be associated with less SROM, meconium stained liquor and vaginal birth and comparatively less neonatal care unit admissions outweighs its advantages over the vaginal misopristol, although either route were equally proven to be effective for inducing labour in women with unfavourable cervix (Bishop's score < 4) at term pregnancy. Keywords vaginal misoprostal

Oral: Vaginal Misoprostol: Which route for induction of term labor?