Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39878306›Full record

ArticleActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2025

Clinical outcomes and feasibility of implementing outpatient labor induction with misoprostol: A prospective cohort study.

Kjersti Engen Marsdal, Ingvil Krarup Sørbye, Stine Bernitz, Nasreen Adan, Elin Baustad Grødal, Anne Flem Jacobsen, Mirjam Lukasse

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04746248 (The LINO Study - Labor Induction Inpatient and Outpatent), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04746248 nacompletednot on this map

The LINO Study - Labor Induction Inpatient and Outpatent: A Pilot- and Feasibility Study of Low-risk Nulliparious Women Using 25 mcg Oral Misoprostol for Labor Induction in an Inpatient and Outpatent Setting in Norway.

TypeinterventionalSponsorOslo Metropolitan UniversityRan2021 to 2022Enrolled200ConditionsInduced, Birth, Labor, InducedArmsOutpatient labor induction, Inpatient labor induction
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Kjersti Engen MarsdalDivision of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-6206-3854
Ingvil Krarup SørbyeDivision of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-8998-4285
Stine BernitzFaculty of Health Sciences, Department of Nursing and Health Promotion, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway.
Nasreen AdanDepartment of Obstetrics, Drammen Hospital, Drammen, Norway.
Elin Baustad GrødalDivision of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Anne Flem JacobsenDivision of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Mirjam LukasseFaculty of Health Sciences, Department of Nursing and Health Promotion, Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

Oslo Metropolitan UniversityOslo universitetssykehus HF
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIn response to the increasing rates of induction of labor (IOL), outpatient IOL has emerged as a potential approach to enhance women's satisfaction while reducing costs and staffing requirements. There is a growing interest in oral misoprostol as an outpatient IOL method, particularly in the Nordic region. This study aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes and feasibility of implementing IOL with oral misoprostol as an outpatient procedure. MATERIAL AND

methodsThis multicenter, prospective cohort study is part of the Labor Induction Inpatient and Outpatient (LINO) project (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04746248). Women with low-risk pregnancies undergoing IOL with oral misoprostol were offered outpatient treatment as an alternative to the standard inpatient approach. The primary outcome was the proportion of births and adverse events occurring before or within 30 min after admission, comparing outpatient and inpatient groups. Secondary outcomes included maternal and neonatal safety and efficacy endpoints.

resultsDuring the study period, 212 women were included in the study: 123 (58.0%) in the outpatient group and 89 (42.0%) in the inpatient group. No births occurred before admission to the hospital or within the first 30 min after admission. Adverse events were rare, and there were no significant differences in safety outcomes between the groups. The duration from hospital admission to giving birth was significantly shorter among women in the outpatient group as compared to the inpatient group (12.3 h vs. 28.1 h, p = 0.001). In the outpatient group, 76.4% of the women completed the misoprostol treatment as outpatients.

conclusionsIn this study of 212 women undergoing IOL with oral misoprostol, we found similar safety outcomes between women who chose outpatient IOL and those who chose inpatient IOL. The outpatient group had significantly shorter hospital stays before giving birth, and more than three in four women in the outpatient group completed the misoprostol treatment as outpatients. While larger studies are needed to draw definitive conclusions, our study suggests that implementing oral misoprostol in an outpatient IOL protocol may represent a safe and feasible alternative.

Indexed as

Ambulatory CareLabor, InducedMisoprostolOxytocicsAdministration, OralAdultFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansPregnancyProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeMisoprostolOxytocicsbirthinduction of labormaternity caremisoprostolobstetricsoutpatient labor induction

Identifiers

PMID39878306
PMCPMC11919703

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.