{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04006677796327212, 'fraction_numerical': 0.03005008347245409, 'mean_word_length': 4.7368421052631575, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 3, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Comparison of misoprostol and ricinus oil meal for cervical ripening and labor induction].

OBJECTIVE
To compare the safety and efficacy of intravaginal prostaglandin E1, misoprostol with ricinus oil meal for labor induction.


METHODS
Sixty patients with an indication for induction of labor were randomly assigned to two groups (30 cases each) induction with misoprotol, 50 micrograms intra-vaginally every 3 hours until active labor, or with that ricinus oil meal was taken.


RESULTS
The time from start of induction to vaginal delivery was significantly shorter in the misoprostol group (12.2 vs 18.1, P < 0.05), and fewer patients in the misoprostol group required oxytocin augmentation (10.0% vs 40.0%, P < 0.05). The mean change in the Bishop score was significantly higher in those receiving misoprostol (5.5 vs 3.1, P < 0.05). Uterine tachysystole occurred more frequently in patients in the misoprostol group (16.7%) than in the ricinus oil meal group (3.0%). No significant differences were noted in the mode of delivery and patients of successful labor induction.


CONCLUSIONS
Vaginally administered misoprostol is an effective agent for the cervical ripening and induction of labor.