Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
491 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2013-05-31
2015-06-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
A Randomized Comparison of Transcervical Foley Bulb With Vaginal Misoprostol to Vaginal Misoprostol Alone for Induction of Labor
NCT02566005
Foley Catheter Versus Vaginal Misoprostol for Cervical Ripening and Induction of Labor
NCT01140971
Induction With Foley OR Misoprostol (INFORM) Study
NCT01801410
Cervical Foley Plus Vaginal Misoprostol for Labor Induction
NCT01279343
Foley Bulb With Oral Misoprostol for Induction of Labor
NCT03407625
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
1. Maternal and neonatal morbidity with prolonged labor The adverse maternal and neonatal morbidity association with prolonged labor has been demonstrated in numerous studies. An increase in maternal risk of post partum hemorrhage and endometritis has been associated with prolonged labor. Cheng et al demonstrated that the risk of post partum hemorrhage and endometritis significantly increased with increasing length of labor. Maghoma et al evaluated the latent phase of labor and found a similar increased risk in endometritis but also noted a significant risk in maternal sepsis with a prolonged latent phase of labor.
Neonatal outcomes are similarly improved with a shorter duration of labor. In addition to the risk of chorioamnionitis and decreased 5 minute Apgar score, there is also a significantly increased risk of neonatal intensive care unit admission as well as neonatal sepsis with prolonged labor.
2. Increased healthcare utilization with prolonged labor Both direct and indirect medical costs have been evaluated in the obstetrics literature. A prolonged labor has been associated with an increase in direct and indirect medical costs as well as an increase in healthcare utilization. Mackenzie et al evaluated the cost of different induction regimens and found a decreased cost for women that remained on the antenatal unit for a shorter period of time.
3. Use of simultaneous induction agents Pettker et al evaluated the use of a transcervical foley with and without oxytocin and found no difference in mode of delivery or delivery within 24 hours. They found that labor was 2.5 hours shorter with the addition of oxytocin although the study was not powered to see a statistical difference. Other studies have looked at the concurrent use of prostaglandin with cervical foley. Barrilleaux et al evaluated the use of oral misoprostol with cervical foley compared to cervical foley alone and found no difference in time to delivery; however, the use of oral misprostol has well known side effects, including a high rate of tachysystole which was found in this study. Hill et al reported a decreased time to second stage and time to delivery with the use of cervical foley and oral misoprostol compared to vaginal misoprostol alone; however this was a small study that used with a higher, more favorable starting Bishop score in the combined foley+misoprostol group, biasing them away from the null. Standardized time cut offs during IOL were not used in this study. Recently, Carbone et al performed a randomized trial comparing foley bulb and misprostol to misoprostol alone and found a decreased time to delivery among those in the combined group. This study was a small trial with 60 patients in each arm and did not compare the combined agents to cervical foley alone.
4. Standardization of IOL The optimal length for an IOL is not well established and data on definitions of a failed IOL and prolonged latent phase are lacking. Multiple studies have shown that within 6 hours of oxytocin administration, 60-70% of patients are in active labor. Although data suggest that the longer latent labor is allowed to proceed, the more women that will deliver vaginally, there is also evidence of an increased risk of morbidity, without a large incremental gain. Certain dosing and regimens of individual agents have been evaluated to try and decrease labor; however, studies have not evaluated the use of time cut offs during an IOL to help reduce variation in practice and standardize the IOL process.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Cervical foley & Misoprostol
Patients randomized to this arm will receive a cervical foley and misoprostol to induce their labor.
Cervical Foley & Misoprostol
A cervical foley combined with misoprostol will be used to induce the patient.
Misoprostol only
Patients randomized to this arm will receive misoprostol only to induce their labor.
Misoprostol Alone
Misoprostol will be used alone to induce the patient
Cervical foley alone
Patients randomized to this arm will receive a cervical foley to induce their labor.
Cervical Foley Alone
A cervical foley alone will be used to induce the patient
Cervical foley & Pitocin
Patients randomized to this arm will receive a cervical foley and pitocin to induce their labor.
Cervical Foley & Pitocin
A cervical foley combined with pitocin will be used to induce the patient
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Cervical Foley & Misoprostol
A cervical foley combined with misoprostol will be used to induce the patient.
Misoprostol Alone
Misoprostol will be used alone to induce the patient
Cervical Foley Alone
A cervical foley alone will be used to induce the patient
Cervical Foley & Pitocin
A cervical foley combined with pitocin will be used to induce the patient
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* singleton gestation
* vertex presentation
* 37 weeks gestational age or greater
* undergoing an IOL
* bishop score less than or equal to 6
* cervical dilation less than or equal to 2cm
Exclusion Criteria
* Contraindication for vaginal delivery
* Prior cesarean delivery
* Multiple gestation
* Intrauterine fetal demise
* Fetal anomaly
* HIV
* Unable to consent/ non-English speaking
* Non-reassuring fetal heart rate
* Patients with hemolysis elevated liver enzymes and low platelets
* Eclampsia
* Intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) 5th percentile with abnormal dopplers
* IUGR less than 10th percentile with reversed end diastolic flow
* Recurrent late decelerations w
* Continuous contractions more than 3 times in 10 minutes at onset of IOL (given that this is a contraindication to misoprostol use at our institution)
* Bishop score is greater than 6
* Cervical dilation greater than or equal to 2cm
* Confirmed ruptured membranes
18 Years
FEMALE
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
University of Pennsylvania
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Lisa D Levine, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of Pennsylvania
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
de Vaan MD, Ten Eikelder ML, Jozwiak M, Palmer KR, Davies-Tuck M, Bloemenkamp KW, Mol BWJ, Boulvain M. Mechanical methods for induction of labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Mar 30;3(3):CD001233. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001233.pub4.
Levine LD, Downes KL, Elovitz MA, Parry S, Sammel MD, Srinivas SK. Mechanical and Pharmacologic Methods of Labor Induction: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Dec;128(6):1357-1364. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001778.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
817897
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.