Vaginal misoprostol versus vaginal dinoprostone for cervical ripening and induction of labour: An individual participant data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Induction of labour (IOL) is common practice and different methods carry different effectiveness and safety profiles.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness, and maternal and perinatal safety outcomes of IOL with vaginal misoprostol versus vaginal dinoprostone using individual participant data from randomised clinical trials.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The following databases were searched from inception to March 2023: CINAHL Plus, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trial Register, Ovid Embase, Ovid Emcare, Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), with viable singleton gestation, no language restrictions, and all published and unpublished data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

An individual participant data meta-analysis was carried out.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten of 52 eligible trials provided individual participant data, of which two were excluded after checking data integrity. The remaining eight trials compared low-dose vaginal misoprostol versus dinoprostone, including 4180 women undergoing IOL, which represents 32.8% of all participants in the published RCTs. Of these, 2077 were assigned to low-dose vaginal misoprostol and 2103 were assigned to vaginal dinoprostone. Compared with vaginal dinoprostone, low-dose vaginal misoprostol had a comparable rate of vaginal birth. Composite adverse perinatal outcomes did not differ between the groups. Compared with vaginal dinoprostone, composite adverse maternal outcomes were significantly lower with low-dose vaginal misoprostol (aOR 0.80, 95% CI 0.65-0.98, P = 0.03, I2  = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose vaginal misoprostol and vaginal dinoprostone for IOL are comparable in terms of effectiveness and perinatal safety. However, low-dose vaginal misoprostol is likely to lead to a lower rate of composite adverse maternal outcomes than vaginal dinoprostone.

Randomised clinical trial research within Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary health services: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

To better understand how to undertake valuable, ethical and sustainable randomised controlled clinical trial (RCT) research within Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary health services.

DESIGN

In a qualitative approach, we utilised data collected between 2013 and 2020 during the planning and implementation of two RCTs. The data comprised agreed records of research meetings, and semistructured interviews with clinical trial stakeholders. The stakeholders were parents/carers of child participants, and site-based research officers, healthcare providers and community advisory groups. Our thematic analysis was informed by constructivist grounded theory.

SETTING

The RCTs investigated the management of otitis media in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, with the first RCT commencing recruitment in 2014 and the second in 2017. They took place in Aboriginal Medical Services (AMSs), large primary health services for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, based in urban and regional communities across two Australian states and one territory.

RESULTS

We analysed data from 56 meetings and 67 interviews, generating themes on making research valuable and undertaking ethical and sustainable RCTs. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leadership, and support of AMSs in their service delivery function were critical. The broad benefits of the trials were considered important to sustainability, including workforce development, enhanced ear healthcare and multidirectional research capacity building. Participants emphasised the long-term responsibility of research teams to deliver benefits to AMSs and communities regardless of RCT outcomes, and to focus on relationships, reciprocity and creating positive experiences of research.

CONCLUSION

We identify principles and strategies to assist in undertaking ethical and sustainable RCTs within Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary health services. Maintaining relationships with AMSs and focusing on mutual workforce development and capacity building creates opportunities for long-term benefits so that health research and RCTs work for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, services, communities and researchers.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12613001068752 (Pre-results); ACTRN12617001652369 (Pre-results).