A Comparison of efficacy and side effects of Drotaverine hydrochloride and valethamate bromide in augmentation of labour

Authors

  • Pratibha Prakash Assistant Professor,Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Nalanda Medical College Hospital, Patna, Bihar,India
  • Renu Rohtagi Professor and Head, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Nalanda Medical College Hospital, Patna , Bihar,India

Keywords:

Drotaverine, valethamate bromide, labour, cervical dilation.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate and compare the effects of Drotaverine hydrochloride and valethamate bromide on cervical dilation and shortening the duration of labour.Materials & Method: Total of 100 primigravida patients in second stage of labour were included in the study and were divided into two groups randomly with 50 patients in each. After a detailed history and examination group A women were given injection drotaverine IM every two hours for maximum of 03 doses and group B were given valethamate bromide 8 mg with maximum of 3 doses half hourly apart. Various parameters of duration of labour, mode of delivery, maternal & fetal complications were compared in both groups.Result: Injection to delivery interval were significantly reduced in group A compared to group B. The rate of cervical dilation was more in drotaverine group than Valethamate bromide group. There was no major side effects in any group but minor side effects like tachycardia and nausea were more common in Valethamate Bromide group than drotaverine group.Conclusion: Both Drotaverine Hydrochloride & Valethamate Bromide are effective in acceleration of active Phase of labour but Drotaverine Hydrochloride accelerates more with less side effects. Reduction of pain during labour is better with Drotaverine Hydrochloride when compared with Valethamate Bromide.

Downloads

Published

2021-12-16

How to Cite

Pratibha Prakash, & Renu Rohtagi. (2021). A Comparison of efficacy and side effects of Drotaverine hydrochloride and valethamate bromide in augmentation of labour. International Journal of Health and Clinical Research, 4(22), 146–147. Retrieved from https://ijhcr.com/index.php/ijhcr/article/view/3536