Den här översättningen är inte klar ännu. Den här sidan är just nu på engelska.

Gå till den engelska sidan

Cure My Disease

Don't miss your cure!

 Log in / Sign up

Pill vs. gel: which works better for starting labor?

NCT ID NCT04955847

Knowledge-focused Sponsor: Centre Hospitalier Universitaire, Amiens Source: ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

What the study statuses mean

This study's is highlighted.

Recruitment status, easiest to join first

Recruiting now
This trial is taking on new participants right now.
Not yet recruiting
Registered, but not yet taking participants.
By invitation only
Not open to general applications. Only people the study team invites can take part.
Paused
Paused for now. It may or may not start again.
Ongoing
Running, but no longer taking on new participants.
Completed This study
The trial has finished. Results may not be published yet.
Stopped early
Stopped early, before it reached the end. That can be for many reasons, including safety.
Cancelled
Cancelled before anyone took part.

Expanded access (not trials)

Expanded access
Not a trial. This treatment can be requested outside a study, case by case, for people who qualify.
Expanded access (paused)
Not a trial. The treatment can normally be requested outside a study, but is unavailable right now.
Expanded access (ended)
Not a trial. The treatment could once be requested outside a study, but no longer can.
Approved
The treatment has been approved, so it is available normally rather than through this programme.

When the status isn't known

Details not published
The full record has not been published yet, so there is little to show here.
Status unknown
This status has not been confirmed recently, so it may be out of date.

First seen Jun 27, 2026 · Last updated Jun 27, 2026

Summary

This study compared two drugs used to start labor in pregnant women at full term with an unfavorable cervix. One group received oral misoprostol pills, the other received vaginal dinoprostone gel or insert. Researchers tracked how many women delivered vaginally within 24 hours, as well as rates of C-sections and side effects. The trial included 706 women and has already been completed.

What this could mean

Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only, not medical advice or a prediction.

Active substance
misoprostol (oral) and dinoprostone (vaginal)
What this could lead to
If oral misoprostol proves as safe and effective as vaginal dinoprostone, it could offer a simpler, cheaper option for inducing labor.
What could go wrong
This is a single-center study comparing two time periods, not a randomized trial, so results may be influenced by other changes in care. The findings may not apply to all hospitals or patients.

This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.

Study facts

What this study's own registry entry says, in plain language.

Participants

706 people

The number who actually took part.

Started

Jan 2021

Finished

May 2021

Lead sponsor

Other sponsor

The registry's catch-all category, for sponsors it does not file as a company, a government agency, or a research network.

Who can take part

This study's own entry requirements. Only the study team can say for certain whether you qualify.

Who is studied

all patients requiring induction of labor with a singleton pregnancy at term, a gestational age greater than 37 weeks of amenorrhea, with a fetus in cephalic presentation and an unfavorable cervix (Bishop score less than six)

Ages

18 years and older

Sex

Female participants only

Healthy volunteers

Not accepted

This study is not open to healthy volunteers. The entry requirements below say who it is open to.

Show the full entry requirements

Copied word for word from the study's registry entry, so the wording is the study team's rather than ours.

Inclusion Criteria: * age of patient\> 18 years * patients requiring induction of labor with a singleton pregnancy at term, a gestational age greater than 37 weeks of amenorrhea, with a fetus in cephalic presentation and an unfavorable cervix (Bishop score less than six). Exclusion Criteria: * intrauterine fetal death, * preterm pregnancy, * scarred uterus * contraindications to vaginal delivery.

Get updates

Get notified about this study

Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for Cesarean section are added.

Vår säkerhetsrekommendation!

Genom att skicka in godkänner du våra Användarvillkor

As listed by the trial registrant

The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.

Cesarean section Induction of labor Vaginal delivery

Contacts and locations

Locations

  • CHU Amiens Picardie

    Amiens, France

More trials for these conditions

Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.