Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2)
Institute
- Medizin (2)
Aim. To compare the efficacy, safety, and patient’s perception of two prostaglandin E2 application methods for induction of labour.
Method. Above 36th weeks of gestation, all women, who were admitted to hospital for induction of labour, were prospectively randomised to intravaginal 1 mg or intracervical 0.5 mg irrespective of cervical Bishop score. The main outcome variables were induction-to-delivery interval, number of foetal blood samples, PDA rate, rate of oxytocin augmentation, rate of vaginal delivery, and patient’s perception using semantic differential questionnaire.
Results. Thirty-nine patients were enrolled in this study. There was no statistical significant difference between the two groups in regard to perceptions of induction. The median induction delivery time using intravaginal versus intracervical administration was 29.9 versus 12.8 hours, respectively (). No statistically difference between the groups was detected in regard to parity, gestation age, cervical Bishop score, number of foetal blood samples, PDA rate, rate of oxytocin augmentation, and mode of birth.
Summary. Irrespective of the cervical Bishop Score, intracervical gel had a shorter induction delivery time without impingement on the women’s perception of induction.
Objective. To examine the effects of clinical hypnosis versus NLP intervention on the success rate of ECV procedures in comparison to a control group.
Methods. A prospective off-centre randomised trial of a clinical hypnosis intervention against NLP of women with a singleton breech fetus at or after 370/7 (259 days) weeks of gestation and normal amniotic fluid index. All 80 participants heard a 20-minute recorded intervention via head phones. Main outcome assessed was success rate of ECV. The intervention groups were compared with a control group with standard medical care alone (n=122).
Results. A total of 42 women, who received a hypnosis intervention prior to ECV, had a 40.5% (n=17), successful ECV, whereas 38 women, who received NLP, had a 44.7% (n=17) successful ECV (P > 0.05). The control group had similar patient characteristics compared to the intervention groups (P > 0.05). In the control group (n = 122) 27.3% (n = 33) had a statistically significant lower successful ECV procedure than NLP (P = 0.05) and hypnosis and NLP (P = 0.03).
Conclusions. These findings suggest that prior clinical hypnosis and NLP have similar success rates of ECV procedures and are both superior to standard medical care alone.