CALL FOR PAPERS

CERTIFICATE

IMPACT FACTOR 2019

Subject Area

  • Life Sciences / Biology
  • Architecture / Building Management
  • Asian Studies
  • Business & Management
  • Chemistry
  • Computer Science
  • Economics & Finance
  • Engineering / Acoustics
  • Environmental Science
  • Agricultural Sciences
  • Pharmaceutical Sciences
  • General Sciences
  • Materials Science
  • Mathematics
  • Medicine
  • Nanotechnology & Nanoscience
  • Nonlinear Science
  • Chaos & Dynamical Systems
  • Physics
  • Social Sciences & Humanities

Why Us? >>

  • Open Access
  • Peer Reviewed
  • Rapid Publication
  • Life time hosting
  • Free promotion service
  • Free indexing service
  • More citations
  • Search engine friendly

Plagiarism Detection

IJCR is following an instant policy on rejection those received papers with plagiarism rate of more than 20%. So, All of authors and contributors must check their papers before submission to making assurance of following our anti-plagiarism policies.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maternal outcomes of using dinoprostone gel and dinoprostone insert for induction of laborat term pregnancy: a comparative study

Author: 
Dr. Ekta, Dr. Lila Vyas, Dr. Ankita Gahlot and Dr. Swati Gait
Subject Area: 
Health Sciences
Abstract: 

Introduction: Induction of labor is defined as the process of artificially stimulating the uterus to start labor. Aims and Objectives: The study was done to compare the maternal outcomes of using dinoprostone gel and dinoprostone insert for induction of labor. Material and Methods: A hospital-based prospective comparative study was conducted in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, SMS Medical College, Jaipur from April 2018 to November 2018. 100 pregnant women at term attending the antenatal clinic were enrolled and were divided into two groups, Group-A (intracervical gel) and B (vaginal insert) comprising 50 women in each group. The primary outcome in terms of mode of delivery, the number of women delivering vaginally, and time interval from induction to delivery were measured. Results: In Group-A, a total of 35 (70.00%) women had a vaginal delivery and 15 (30.00%) had a cesarean section. In Group-B, a total of 38 (76.00%) women had a vaginal delivery and 12 (24.00%) women had cesarean section According to parity, greater number of primipara women delivered vaginally in insert group. Similarly, a greater number of multipara delivered with insert. In the present study, 35.30% primiparas and 18.75% multiparas had a caesarean section in the gel group, whereas 33.33% primiparas and 5.89% multiparas had a cesarean delivery in the insert group. In primipara women, the time interval from induction to vaginal delivery was shorter (18.18 ± 2.11 hours) in the insert group as compared to gel (19.2 ± 2.06 hours). Similar results were seen in multiparas (gel, 14.3 ± 3.12 hours vs. insert, 13.26 ± 1.14 hours). Conclusion: In terms of successful vaginal delivery, dinoprostone vaginal insert is similar to intracervical gel in efficacy.

PDF file: 

IJMCE RECOMMENDATION

ONLINE PAYPAL PAYMENT

CURRENT ISSUE

NEWS

CHIEF EDITOR
Rosane Cavalcante Fragoso, Brasil
ASSOCIATE CHIEF EDITOR

   

Jean-Marc SABATIER
Chief Scientific Officer and Head of a Research Group
France

Advantages of IJCR

  • Rapid Publishing
  • Professional publishing practices
  • Indexing in leading database
  • High level of citation
  • High Qualitiy reader base
  • High level author suport

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EDITORIAL BOARD

Luai Farhan Zghair
Iraq
Hasan Ali Abed Al-Zu’bi
Jordanian
Fredrick OJIJA
Tanzanian
Firuza M. Tursunkhodjaeva
Uzbekistan
Faraz Ahmed Farooqi
Saudi Arabia
Eric Randy Reyes Politud
Philippines
Elsadig Gasoom FadelAlla Elbashir
Sudan
Eapen, Asha Sarah
United State
Dr.Arun Kumar A
India
Dr. Zafar Iqbal
Pakistan
Dr. SHAHERA S.PATEL
India
Dr. Ruchika Khanna
India
Dr. Recep TAS
Turkey
Dr. Rasha Ali Eldeeb
Egypt
Dr. Pralhad Kanhaiyalal Rahangdale
India
DR. PATRICK D. CERNA
Philippines
Dr. Nicolas Padilla- Raygoza
Mexico
Dr. Mustafa Y. G. Younis
Libiya
Dr. Muhammad shoaib Ahmedani
Saudi Arabia
DR. MUHAMMAD ISMAIL MOHMAND
United State
DR. MAHESH SHIVAJI CHAVAN
India
DR. M. ARUNA
India
Dr. Lim Gee Nee
Malaysia
Dr. Jatinder Pal Singh Chawla
India
DR. IRAM BOKHARI
Pakistan
Dr. FARHAT NAZ RAHMAN
Pakistan
Dr. Devendra kumar Gupta
India
Dr. ASHWANI KUMAR DUBEY
India
Dr. Ali Seidi
Iran
Dr. Achmad Choerudin
Indonesia
Dr Ashok Kumar Verma
India
Thi Mong Diep NGUYEN
France
Dr. Muhammad Akram
Pakistan
Dr. Imran Azad
Oman
Dr. Meenakshi Malik
India
Aseel Hadi Hamzah
Iraq
Anam Bhatti
Malaysia
Md. Amir Hossain
Bangladesh
Ahmet İPEKÇİ
Turkey
Mirzadi Gohari
Iran