比较世界卫生组织与中国推荐的早孕药物流产方案:一项回顾性分析。

Comparing the World Health Organization-versus China-recommended protocol for first-trimester medical abortion: a retrospective analysis.

机构信息

Research and Metrics Team, Health System Department, Marie Stopes International, London, UK.

出版信息

Int J Womens Health. 2012;4:123-7. doi: 10.2147/IJWH.S30354. Epub 2012 Mar 26.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness, in terms of complete abortion, of the World Health Organization (WHO)- and the China-recommended protocol for first-trimester medical abortion.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of clinical data from women presenting for first trimester medical abortion between January 2009 and August 2010 at reproductive health clinics in Qingdao, Xi'an, Nanjing, Nanning, and Zhengzhou was conducted. One clinic in Qingdao administered the WHO-recommended protocol (200 mg mifepristone orally followed by 0.8 mg misoprostol buccally 36-48 hours later). Four clinics in the other locations provided the China-recommended procedure (Day 1: 50 mg of mifepristone in the morning, 25 mg in the afternoon; Day 2: 50 mg of mifepristone in the morning, 25 mg in the afternoon; Day 3: 0.6 mg oral misoprostol). Data on reproductive and demographic characteristics were extracted from clinic records, and complete termination was determined on day 14 (post-mifepristone administration).

RESULTS

A total of 337 women underwent early medical abortion (167 WHO- and 170 China-recommended procedures). Complete abortion was significantly higher among women who had the WHO protocol than those who received the China protocol (91.0% vs 77.7%, respectively; P < 0.001). Women using the China-recommended protocol were three times more likely to require an additional dose of misoprostol than women using the WHO protocol (21.8% vs 7.8%, respectively; P < 0.001), and had significantly more bleeding on the day of misoprostol administration (12.5 mL vs 18.5 mL; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This clinical audit provides preliminary evidence suggesting the WHO-recommended protocol may be more effective than the China-recommended protocol for early medical abortion. A larger scale study is necessary to compare the methods' effectiveness and acceptability.

摘要

目的

比较世界卫生组织(WHO)和中国推荐的用于早孕药物流产的方案在完全流产方面的效果。

方法

对 2009 年 1 月至 2010 年 8 月在青岛、西安、南京、南宁和郑州的生殖健康诊所就诊的早孕药物流产患者的临床数据进行回顾性分析。青岛的一个诊所采用 WHO 推荐的方案(米非司酮 200mg 口服,36-48 小时后米索前列醇 0.8mg 颊部给药)。其他 4 个诊所采用中国推荐的方案(第 1 天:米非司酮 50mg 早晚各 1 次;第 2 天:米非司酮 50mg 早晚各 1 次;第 3 天:米索前列醇 0.6mg 口服)。从诊所记录中提取生殖和人口统计学特征数据,并在药物流产后第 14 天(米非司酮给药后)确定完全流产情况。

结果

共有 337 名女性接受了早期药物流产(167 例采用 WHO 方案,170 例采用中国方案)。采用 WHO 方案的女性完全流产率明显高于采用中国方案的女性(91.0%对 77.7%;P<0.001)。采用中国方案的女性需要追加米索前列醇的可能性是采用 WHO 方案的女性的 3 倍(21.8%对 7.8%;P<0.001),而且在给予米索前列醇当天的出血量也明显更多(12.5ml 对 18.5ml;P<0.001)。

结论

本临床审计初步提供了证据,表明与中国推荐的方案相比,WHO 推荐的方案可能更适合早孕药物流产。需要进行更大规模的研究来比较这两种方法的效果和可接受性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索