Background:The present study was conducted for comparing the safety and efficacy of intravaginal misoprostol and intracervical dinoprostone in induction of labor. Materials &Methods:A total of 100 subjects were enrolled and were broadly and randomly divided into two study groups with 50 subjects in each group as follows: Misoprostol group and Dinoprostone group. Complete demographic and clinical details of all the subjects were obtained. Subjects of Misoprostol group received 50 µg misoprostol tablet vaginally while subjects of Dinoprostone group received0.5 mg dinoprostone gel. In most cases the fetal heart was auscultated every fifteen minutes until the onset of labor. Surveillance by continuous palpation for uterine hypertonicity and auscultation after each contraction were started as soon as labor was established. Cardiotocography was reserved for cases with signs of fetal distress. All the results were recorded in Microsoft excel sheet followed by statistical analysis using SPSS software. Results:Need for second dose among Misoprostol group and Dinoprostone group was in 8 percent and 16 percent of the subjects respectively. Need for oxytocin infusion among Misoprostol group and Dinoprostone group was in 16 percent and 38 percent of the subjects respectively. Vaginal delivery occurred in 98 percent of the subjects of the Misoprostol group and in 88 percent of the subjects of the Dinoprostone group. Conclusion:Misoprostol should be preferred to intracervical dinoprostone in induction of labor.