ArticleJournal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India2020
Randomised Controlled Trial of Sublingual and Rectal Misoprostol in the Prevention of Primary Postpartum Haemorrhage in a Resource-Limited Community.
Article in Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06364098 (Comparative Study Between the Roles of Intrauterine Misoprostol Versus the Sublingual Route for Prevention of Postpartum Blood Loss in Elective Cesarean Sections), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Comparative Study Between the Roles of Intrauterine Misoprostol Versus the Sublingual Route for Prevention of Postpartum Blood Loss in Elective Cesarean Sections: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background/purposeMisoprostol is beneficial in preventing postpartum haemorrhage (PPH). However, there is no consensus yet as to which route will give the balance of efficacy, safety and patient preference, especially at the recommended dose of 600 mcg. This study compared the efficacy and adverse effects of rectal and sublingual misoprostol for the prevention of PPH.
methodsIn a prospective fashion, consenting eligible parturients were randomised into two groups to receive either 600 mcg of misoprostol rectally or sublingually after vaginal delivery. All study participants were followed up till 24 h postpartum. Primary outcomes were blood loss of 500 ml or greater and at least 10% change in peripartum haematocrit levels.
resultsSeven (6.7%) and 16 (15.7%) of the sublingual and rectal routes, respectively, had PPH. However, the odds of having PPH after rectal misoprostol were at least twice the odds after the sublingual route (
conclusionAt the recommended dose, sublingually administered misoprostol ('the sweet of life') is associated with a lower incidence of PPH than the rectal route. Despite its higher incidence of shivering and pyrexia, it was accepted by more women than rectally administered misoprostol.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.