International Journal of Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Background: The initiation of labour in humans is a natural biological process governed by multiple physiological mechanisms. While most pregnancies result in spontaneous onset of labour, certain maternal or fetal conditions may necessitate medical induction. Among the pharmacological options available, prostaglandin analogues have emerged as the most commonly used agents for inducing labour. This study was undertaken to compare the efficacy and safety of two such agents vaginal misoprostol and intracervical Cerviprime gel in facilitating labour induction.
Methods: A total of 100 pregnant women were enrolled and randomly assigned into two equal groups. Group I received 25 ?g of misoprostol vaginally every six hours for a maximum of five doses, while Group II was administered 0.5 mg of intracervical Cerviprime gel. The maternal and fetal outcomes were assessed and compared between the groups. Parameters analyzed included the induction-to-delivery interval, requirement for oxytocin augmentation, mode of delivery, and adverse maternal or neonatal effects.
Results: The findings revealed a significantly shorter induction-to-delivery interval in the misoprostol group compared to the Cerviprime gel group. Moreover, the requirement for oxytocin augmentation was notably lower among women induced with misoprostol. Both groups exhibited comparable maternal and fetal safety profiles, with no statistically significant differences in Apgar scores or adverse neonatal outcomes.
Conclusion: Vaginal misoprostol was found to be a more effective and convenient agent for the induction of labour compared to intracervical Cerviprime gel. It demonstrated a shorter induction-to-delivery interval, required less oxytocin support, and was well-tolerated by both mother and fetus. Misoprostol’s ease of use, cost-effectiveness, and stability make it a practical alternative, particularly in resource-limited settings.