Misoprostol for Secondary Prevention of Postpartum Hemorrhage at the Community Level in India
|Study Design:||Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: None (Open Label)
Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
|Official Title:||Two Community Strategies Comparing Use of Misoprostol for Secondary Prevention to Primary Prevention for Postpartum Hemorrhage: A Randomized Cluster Non-Inferiority Study in Bijapur District, Karnataka, India|
- Proportion of women with post-delivery hemoglobin ≤ 7.8 gm/dL [ Time Frame: 72 hours (plus or minus 8 hours) after delivery ]A 20% rate of post delivery Hb ≤7.8 gm/dL in the study arm with women receiving selective administration of 800 mcg sublingual misoprostol is non-inferior to a 13% rate of post delivery Hb ≤ 7.8 gm/dL in the study arm with women receiving universal 600 mcg oral misoprostol prophylaxis.
- Rate of transfer to referral facilities for PPH [ Time Frame: within 72 hours (plus or minus 8 hours) after delivery ]Proportion of women who are transferred from the location of delivery to higher level of care because the birth attendent diagnosed or suspected PPH.
- Rate of PPH [ Time Frame: within 1 hour after delivery ]Proportion of women with 500 mL-999 mL blood loss following delivery, as measured by a calibrated blood collection drape.
- Rate of severe PPH [ Time Frame: within 1 hour after delivery ]Proportion of women with > 1000 mL blood loss following delivery, as measured by a calibrated blood collection drape.
- Rate of adverse events [ Time Frame: Within 72 hours (plus or minus 8 hours) after delivery ]Adverse events include prolonged hospitalization, permanent or serious disability, additional threat to life, or death.
- Mean blood loss [ Time Frame: 1 hour after delivery ]Blood loss will be measured using a blood collection drape, calibrated at 50 mL intervals.
- Rate of additional interventions needed to control bleeding [ Time Frame: within 72 hours (plus or minus 8 hours) after delivery ]Addtional interventions include administration of other uterotonics (e.g., oxytocin), IV fluids, comprehensive emergency obstetric care, blood transfusion and surgery
- Cost-effectiveness [ Time Frame: 72 hours (plus or minus 8 hours) after delivery ]The cost-effectiveness of the two interventions will be compared. The cost-effectiveness measure will utilize information collected on cost of the study drug, materials used to control bleeding, and the cost of transfer and subsequent care received by women who are in in need of higher level care.
- Proportion of women reporting known side effects of misoprostol [ Time Frame: 1 hour after delivery ]Recognized side-effects of misoprostol include: Shivering, fever, headache, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea. Rare side effects include: abdominal pain from uterine cramping, seizures and palpitations (only with overdosing). All women in both study arms, including those in the secondary prevention arm who do not receive the study drug, will be asked if they experienced any of these symptoms.
- Acceptability of intervention to women [ Time Frame: 72 hours (plus or minus 8 hours) after delivery ]A brief exit interview will be conducted with participants to assess their acceptability of the intervention, including tolerability of any side effects experienced.
|Study Start Date:||December 2011|
|Study Completion Date:||March 2014|
|Primary Completion Date:||March 2014 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)|
Universal administration of 600 mcg oral misoprostol given to all women within 5 minutes of delivery of the baby
Selective administration of 800 mcg sublingual misoprostol to women with at least 350 mL blood loss within 1 hour following delivery
Rationale for Research: There is an absence of concrete data on the programmatic and cost-effectiveness of different service delivery models for prevention and treatment of postpartum hemorrhage with misoprostol, prompting a discussion of whether resources are best spent on misoprostol for primary prevention at lower levels (with treatment carried out at higher levels via referral) or whether immediate proactive treatment strategies should be considered. As the training and policy implications of universal prevention versus selective treatment approaches vary, simple and effective service delivery models are urgently needed to help governments and organizations decide how to best focus their limited resources. This study proposes to study the efficacy of a hybrid strategy (i.e., secondary prevention) that combines elements of prevention and treatment. Results of this study could provide a new model of care that will medicate fewer women, save costs and address the clinical conundrum of guessing at the safety of administering a prevention dose of misoprostol followed quickly by a larger treatment dose.
Study design: This randomized cluster trial will recruit women with deliveries attended by auxiliary nurse midwives (ANMs) that occur at homes or at health sub-centers. ANMs will be randomized to administer the intervention as described in the primary or secondary prevention arm.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01462422
|Deliveries at health sub-centers and homes|
|Bijapur, Karnataka, India, 586103|
|Principal Investigator:||Beverly Winikoff, MD, MPH||Gynuity Health Projects|
|Principal Investigator:||Sheila Raghavan, MSc||Gynuity Health Projects|
|Principal Investigator:||Stacie Gellar, PhD||University of Illinois at Chicago|
|Principal Investigator:||Suellen Miller, PhD, CNM||University of California, San Francisco|
|Principal Investigator:||Shivaprasad S Goudar, MD, MHPE||Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College|