Cargando…

Comparison of Effectiveness and Patient Satisfaction of Vaginal Versus Oral Misoprostol in Treatment of Missed Miscarriage

BACKGROUND: In recent years’ medical management with misoprostol is an effective alternative to surgical evacuation. But there is a dearth of evidence to reveal the effectiveness of the different routes of misoprostol and satisfaction rate among the patients treated with these routes. AIM: This stud...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mohammadi, Elham, Jayaprakash, Geetha, Shiva, Afshin, Motallebzadeh, Nader
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Republic of Macedonia 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6454167/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30976339
http://dx.doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2019.192
_version_ 1783409520544841728
author Mohammadi, Elham
Jayaprakash, Geetha
Shiva, Afshin
Motallebzadeh, Nader
author_facet Mohammadi, Elham
Jayaprakash, Geetha
Shiva, Afshin
Motallebzadeh, Nader
author_sort Mohammadi, Elham
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In recent years’ medical management with misoprostol is an effective alternative to surgical evacuation. But there is a dearth of evidence to reveal the effectiveness of the different routes of misoprostol and satisfaction rate among the patients treated with these routes. AIM: This study was conducted to compare the effectiveness and patient’s satisfaction rate of vaginal versus oral misoprostol. METHODS: It was a prospective non-interventional study. One hundred women of having missed abortion confirmed by ultrasonography examination were enrolled in the trial. Fifty-eight subjects were administered 200 mcg of oral and 42 subjects received 200 mcg of vaginal misoprostol every four hours up to four doses. If complete expulsion did not occur 12 hours after the last dose, the surgical evacuation was done. RESULTS: There was no significant statistical difference between the effectiveness of treatment with vaginal (78.57%) and oral misoprostol (79.31%) (p = 0.928). The difference between Patients’ satisfaction at the time of discharge for the vaginal group (64.29%) and oral group (65.52%) was not statistically significant (P = 0.991). There was an increase in patients’ satisfaction for both groups at the follow-up session, but still, the difference was not significant (P = 0.897). CONCLUSION: This study confirms that there is no statistical difference between the effectiveness and patient satisfaction of oral and vaginal misoprostol in the treatment of missed abortion.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6454167
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Republic of Macedonia
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64541672019-04-11 Comparison of Effectiveness and Patient Satisfaction of Vaginal Versus Oral Misoprostol in Treatment of Missed Miscarriage Mohammadi, Elham Jayaprakash, Geetha Shiva, Afshin Motallebzadeh, Nader Open Access Maced J Med Sci Clinical Science BACKGROUND: In recent years’ medical management with misoprostol is an effective alternative to surgical evacuation. But there is a dearth of evidence to reveal the effectiveness of the different routes of misoprostol and satisfaction rate among the patients treated with these routes. AIM: This study was conducted to compare the effectiveness and patient’s satisfaction rate of vaginal versus oral misoprostol. METHODS: It was a prospective non-interventional study. One hundred women of having missed abortion confirmed by ultrasonography examination were enrolled in the trial. Fifty-eight subjects were administered 200 mcg of oral and 42 subjects received 200 mcg of vaginal misoprostol every four hours up to four doses. If complete expulsion did not occur 12 hours after the last dose, the surgical evacuation was done. RESULTS: There was no significant statistical difference between the effectiveness of treatment with vaginal (78.57%) and oral misoprostol (79.31%) (p = 0.928). The difference between Patients’ satisfaction at the time of discharge for the vaginal group (64.29%) and oral group (65.52%) was not statistically significant (P = 0.991). There was an increase in patients’ satisfaction for both groups at the follow-up session, but still, the difference was not significant (P = 0.897). CONCLUSION: This study confirms that there is no statistical difference between the effectiveness and patient satisfaction of oral and vaginal misoprostol in the treatment of missed abortion. Republic of Macedonia 2019-03-26 /pmc/articles/PMC6454167/ /pubmed/30976339 http://dx.doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2019.192 Text en Copyright: © 2019 Elham Mohammadi, Geetha Jayaprakash, Afshin Shiva, Nader Motallebzadeh http://creativecommons.org/licenses/CC BY-NC/4.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0).
spellingShingle Clinical Science
Mohammadi, Elham
Jayaprakash, Geetha
Shiva, Afshin
Motallebzadeh, Nader
Comparison of Effectiveness and Patient Satisfaction of Vaginal Versus Oral Misoprostol in Treatment of Missed Miscarriage
title Comparison of Effectiveness and Patient Satisfaction of Vaginal Versus Oral Misoprostol in Treatment of Missed Miscarriage
title_full Comparison of Effectiveness and Patient Satisfaction of Vaginal Versus Oral Misoprostol in Treatment of Missed Miscarriage
title_fullStr Comparison of Effectiveness and Patient Satisfaction of Vaginal Versus Oral Misoprostol in Treatment of Missed Miscarriage
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Effectiveness and Patient Satisfaction of Vaginal Versus Oral Misoprostol in Treatment of Missed Miscarriage
title_short Comparison of Effectiveness and Patient Satisfaction of Vaginal Versus Oral Misoprostol in Treatment of Missed Miscarriage
title_sort comparison of effectiveness and patient satisfaction of vaginal versus oral misoprostol in treatment of missed miscarriage
topic Clinical Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6454167/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30976339
http://dx.doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2019.192
work_keys_str_mv AT mohammadielham comparisonofeffectivenessandpatientsatisfactionofvaginalversusoralmisoprostolintreatmentofmissedmiscarriage
AT jayaprakashgeetha comparisonofeffectivenessandpatientsatisfactionofvaginalversusoralmisoprostolintreatmentofmissedmiscarriage
AT shivaafshin comparisonofeffectivenessandpatientsatisfactionofvaginalversusoralmisoprostolintreatmentofmissedmiscarriage
AT motallebzadehnader comparisonofeffectivenessandpatientsatisfactionofvaginalversusoralmisoprostolintreatmentofmissedmiscarriage