Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12076470›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2002

Hydration for treatment of preterm labour.

C Stan, M Boulvain, P Hirsbrunner-Amagbaly, R Pfister

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Association between greenness, urbanicity, and birth weight.The Science of the total environment · 2016
    Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

C StanUnité de Développement en Obstétrique, Maternité Hôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, Boulevard de la Cluse 32, Geneva 14, Switzerland, CH-1211. catalinmstan@hotmail.com
M Boulvain
P Hirsbrunner-Amagbaly
R Pfister
University of Geneva · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHydration has been proposed as a treatment for women with preterm labour. Theoretically, hydration may reduce uterine contractility by increasing uterine blood flow and by decreasing pituitary secretion of antidiuretic hormone and oxytocin.

objectivesTo evaluate the effectiveness of intravenous or oral hydration to avoid preterm birth and its consequences in women with preterm labour. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register (January 2002), the Cochrane Controlled Trials register (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2002) and bibliographies of relevant papers were searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, including women with a viable pregnancy less than 37 completed weeks' gestation and presenting with preterm labour, comparing intravenous or oral hydration with no treatment. The intervention might or might not be associated with bed rest. Studies comparing tocolytic drugs with intravenous fluids used in the control group as a placebo were not included in this review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed the reports, to determine if the study met the inclusion criteria and to evaluate the methodological quality. Data were extracted independently by two of the reviewers. The results were expressed as relative risks (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean difference for continuous outcomes. MAIN

resultsTwo studies, including a total of 228 women with preterm labour and intact membranes, compared intravenous hydration with bed rest alone. Risk of preterm delivery, before 37 weeks (relative risk (RR): 1.09; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.71-1.68), before 34 weeks (RR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.20-2.56) or before 32 weeks (RR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.29-1.97), was similar between groups. Admission to neonatal intensive care unit occurred with similar frequency in both groups (RR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.46-2.16). Cost of treatment was slightly higher (US$39) in the hydration group. This difference was not statistically significant and only includes hospital costs during a visit of less than 24 hours. No studies evaluated oral hydration. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsThe data are too few to support the use of hydration as a specific treatment for women presenting with preterm labour. The two small studies available do not show any advantage of hydration compared to bed rest alone. Intravenous hydration does not seem to be beneficial, even during the period of evaluation soon after admission, in women with preterm labour. Women with evidence of dehydration may, however, benefit from the intervention.

Indexed as

FemaleFluid TherapyHumansInfusions, IntravenousObstetric Labor, PrematurePregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID12076470
OpenAlexW4245463911

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.