RESEARCH SUMMARY TABLE2Author (year)PurposeSample/Numberof Participants(providedescriptivestatistics)DesignLevel ofEvidenceFindings(provideanyinferentialstatistics)LimitationsKandil, Emarh, Sayyed, & Masood (2012).To determine if a transcervical foley catheteris an effectivealternative to vaginal misoprostol in inducing labor in primigravidaswho are post term, 41 weeks or more gestation, with Bishop score <4. Randomized controlled trial of100 primigravid womenComparison study, participants were randomly assigned to 2 groups. Group1 received transcervical foley catheter.Group 2 received 25 mcg misoprostol vaginally every 4 hours.At 3-4cm dilation, amniotomy was done in both groups. Evidence from a comparison descriptive study. Single random controlled trial (RCT). The foley catheter group had a 76% of vaginal delivery as opposed to the misoprostol group of 80% delivered vaginally. The induction to delivery time was shorter in the foley catheter group. The sample size is smallto be externally valid. A larger random study needs to be done. Noor, Ansari, Ali, & Parveen, (2015)To compare vaginal misoprostol to transcervical foley catheterfor induction of labor due to maternal or fetal indication warranting delivery, gestational age >37 weeks with Bishop score < or = 4. Randomized controlled study of 104 women requiring delivery due to maternal or fetal indicationsComparison study in which participants were randomly assigned to 2 groups. Group1 was given 25 mcg of misoprostol vaginally, 4 times hourly, max dose of 6. Group 2 a 16F transcervical foley catheter with 50 ml sterile saline Evidence from a single RCT.Misoprostol group had a 76.7% vaginal delivery rateas opposed to foley catheter group had a 56.8% vaginal delivery rate. Misoprostol had a shorterinduction to delivery rate& higher rate of vaginal The sample size of this study was small and a larger study would need to be done to be able tovalidate thisstudy’s findings.