We have located links that may give you full text access.
Foley catheter and controlled release dinoprostone versus foley catheter labor induction in nulliparas: a randomized trial.
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2022 January 10
PURPOSE: To evaluate Foley catheter and controlled release dinoprostone insert compared to foley catheter alone on induction to delivery interval and maternal satisfaction.
METHODS: A randomized trial was conducted in a university hospital in Malaysia from December 2018 to May 2019. Term nulliparas with unfavorable cervix (Bishop score ≤ 5) scheduled for labor induction were randomized to Foley catheter and controlled release dinoprostone insert simultaneously or Foley catheter alone. Primary outcomes were induction to delivery interval (hours) and maternal satisfaction on birth experience (assessed by 11-point Visual Numerical Rating Scale VNRS 0-10, higher score more satisfied).
RESULTS: Induction to vaginal delivery intervals was mean ± standard deviation 22.5 ± 10.4 vs. 35.1 ± 14.9 h, P = < 0.001 but maternal satisfaction on birth experience was not significantly different median[interquartile range] VNRS 8[7-9] vs. 8[7-9], P = 0.12 for Foley catheter-controlled-release dinoprostone and Foley catheter alone arms, respectively. Cesarean delivery rates were 35/102(34.3%) vs. 50/101(49.5%), P = 0.02 RR 0.7 95% CI 0.5-0.9 NNTb 6.3 95% CI 3.5-39.4, pain score at 6 h after catheter insertion 5[2-8] vs. 1[1-3], P < 0.001, Bishop score at trial devices removal 9[9-10] vs. 8[7-9], P = 0.001, requirement for oxytocin induction or augmentation 39/102(38.2%) vs. 76/101(75.2%) NNTb 3 95% CI 2.0-4.1, P < 0.001 and amniotomy rates 73/99(73.7%) vs. 81/95(85.3%), P = 0.052 RR 0.9 85% CI 0.8-1.0 in Foley catheter-controlled-release dinoprostone and Foley catheter alone arms respectively.
CONCLUSION: In nulliparas with unripe cervixes at term, combined Foley catheter and controlled release dinoprostone vaginal insert compared to Foley catheter alone reduces the induction to vaginal delivery interval and cesarean delivery rate but satisfaction was not significantly increased.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN2282883, 03/12/2018, "prospectively registered" ( https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN12282883 ).
METHODS: A randomized trial was conducted in a university hospital in Malaysia from December 2018 to May 2019. Term nulliparas with unfavorable cervix (Bishop score ≤ 5) scheduled for labor induction were randomized to Foley catheter and controlled release dinoprostone insert simultaneously or Foley catheter alone. Primary outcomes were induction to delivery interval (hours) and maternal satisfaction on birth experience (assessed by 11-point Visual Numerical Rating Scale VNRS 0-10, higher score more satisfied).
RESULTS: Induction to vaginal delivery intervals was mean ± standard deviation 22.5 ± 10.4 vs. 35.1 ± 14.9 h, P = < 0.001 but maternal satisfaction on birth experience was not significantly different median[interquartile range] VNRS 8[7-9] vs. 8[7-9], P = 0.12 for Foley catheter-controlled-release dinoprostone and Foley catheter alone arms, respectively. Cesarean delivery rates were 35/102(34.3%) vs. 50/101(49.5%), P = 0.02 RR 0.7 95% CI 0.5-0.9 NNTb 6.3 95% CI 3.5-39.4, pain score at 6 h after catheter insertion 5[2-8] vs. 1[1-3], P < 0.001, Bishop score at trial devices removal 9[9-10] vs. 8[7-9], P = 0.001, requirement for oxytocin induction or augmentation 39/102(38.2%) vs. 76/101(75.2%) NNTb 3 95% CI 2.0-4.1, P < 0.001 and amniotomy rates 73/99(73.7%) vs. 81/95(85.3%), P = 0.052 RR 0.9 85% CI 0.8-1.0 in Foley catheter-controlled-release dinoprostone and Foley catheter alone arms respectively.
CONCLUSION: In nulliparas with unripe cervixes at term, combined Foley catheter and controlled release dinoprostone vaginal insert compared to Foley catheter alone reduces the induction to vaginal delivery interval and cesarean delivery rate but satisfaction was not significantly increased.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN2282883, 03/12/2018, "prospectively registered" ( https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN12282883 ).
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app