Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37426940›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X2023

Women satisfaction on choosing the cervical ripening method: Oral misoprostol versus balloon catheter.

Emeline Flament, Pauline Blanc-Petitjean, Antoine Koch, Philippe Deruelle, Camille Le Ray, Nicolas Sananès

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Emeline FlamentDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Strasbourg University Hospital, 1 Avenue Moliere, 67200 Strasbourg, France.
Pauline Blanc-PetitjeanDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, Rennes University Hospital, 2 Rue Henri Leguilloux, 35033 Rennes, France.
Antoine KochDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Strasbourg University Hospital, 1 Avenue Moliere, 67200 Strasbourg, France.
Philippe DeruelleDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Strasbourg University Hospital, 1 Avenue Moliere, 67200 Strasbourg, France.
Camille Le RayPort-Royal Maternity Unit, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital Cochin, FHU préma, 123 Bd de Port-Royal, 75014 Paris, France.
Nicolas SananèsDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Strasbourg University Hospital, 1 Avenue Moliere, 67200 Strasbourg, France.
Université de Strasbourg · FRInserm · FRMaternité Port Royal · FRUniversité de Rennes · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Induction of labor concerns about 29 % of women in Unites States and 33 % in Europe. Among the various methods for cervical ripening, the efficacy and safety profiles of oral misoprostol and balloon catheter are comparable, but data in the literature on maternal satisfaction during induction of labor are few. The objective of this study was to assess the satisfaction of women who chose the method of cervical ripening, i.e. either balloon catheter or oral misoprostol, for induction of labor. Study design: This retrospective study asked women who had undergone induction of labor between February 1, 2020 and February 28, 2021. After receiving verbal and written information, the choice of method between oral misoprostol and balloon catheter was left to the patient's free appreciation. Satisfaction was assessed by means of a questionnaire distributed to all women during their stay in the maternity unit. The principal assessment criterion was based on women' inclination to choose the same cervical ripening method if induction of labor were to prove necessary in a future pregnancy, and their willingness to recommend this method to a friend. Univariate analyses were conducted using Student's t-test, Chi-2 test or Fisher's exact test. Results: On 575 women eligible for analysis, 365 (63.5 %) of these women replied to the satisfaction questionnaire. Of this number, 236 (64.7 %) chose cervical ripening by balloon catheter, and 129 (35.3 %) by oral misoprostol. No significant difference was found between the two groups: 68.2 % of women in the balloon catheter group would opt for the same method of cervical ripening if it proved necessary in a future pregnancy and 64.7% would recommend it to a pregnant friend, versus 65.9 % and 63.6 % in the oral misoprostol group, respectively. Women were overall pleased to be able to choose their method of cervical ripening: 90.5 % of patients in the balloon catheter group and 95.3 % in the oral misoprostol group. Conclusions: When women choose the method of cervical ripening, satisfaction is overall good, irrespective of the method, whether by balloon catheter or misoprostol.

Indexed as

Balloon catheterCervical ripeningInduction of laborMaternal satisfactionProstaglandins

Identifiers

PMID37426940
PMCPMC10329108
OpenAlexW4380987830

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.