To Compare the Outcome of Induction of Labour by Intracervical Foley's Catheter and Misoprostol Versus Misoprostol Alone

Background: Combining a mechanical method of induction of labour with pharmacological method may decrease the induction to delivery interval by achieving cervical ripening in lesser time.

Aims and objectives: Aim: To assess the comparative outcome of induction of labour by intracervical Foley’s catheter and misoprostol versus misoprostol alone.

Primary Objective: •To identify the induction-delivery outcome with the use of 2 methods of induction, i.e., Foley’s catheter-misoprostol combination and misoprostol alone.

• To find out the maternal and neonatal outcome with the use of Foley’s catheter-misoprostol combination and misoprostol alone.

Secondary Objective: To study the rates of cesarean section in the two groups; Foley’s catheter-misoprostol combination group and misoprostol alone group.

Materials and Methods: This Randomised Control Study was conducted in the patients undergoing induction of labour, in the department of obstetrics and gynaecology, CMC, Ludhiana. As per inclusion and exclusion criteria, 100 patients were randomised into two groups, by block randomization, 50 each. In one group, induction was carried out by use of intracervical foley’s catheter and 25 mcg misoprostol vaginally, simultaneously and vaginal 25 mcg misoprostol alone in second group. This was followed by per vaginal misoprostol, 25 mcg every 4 hourly till the onset of moderate uterine contractions, in both the groups.

Results and Observations: In both the groups, a similar proportion of patients underwent a vaginal delivery after induction of labour (68% in foley’s plus misoprostol group and 74% in misoprostol alone group). The mean time between the induction and delivery in patients of foley’s plus misoprostol group was 13.17 ± 6.63 hours and in misoprostol alone group, it was 12.59 ± 5.14 hours, which was similar in both the groups. The rates of cesarean section in the two groups were comparable. (32% in Group A and 24% in Group B). There were no maternal or fetal complications found in the patients studied

Conclusion: none of the methods studied was superior to the other in terms of successful vaginal deliveries, induction to delivery interval, maternal or neonatal outcomes. The difference in the rates of cesarean section in both the groups was not statistically significant.