ArticleJournal of health, population, and nutrition2006
Active management of third stage of labour saves facility costs in Guatemala and Zambia.
Article in Journal of health, population, and nutrition, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Health technology assessment to support health benefits package design: a systematic review of economic evaluation evidence in Zambia.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- The cost-effectiveness of preventing, diagnosing, and treating postpartum haemorrhage: A systematic review of economic evaluations.PLoS medicine · 2024Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of Health Economic Evaluations and Budget Impact Analyses to Inform Healthcare Decision-Making in Central America.Applied health economics and health policy · 2023Pooled it
- Experiencing challenges when implementing active management of third stage of labor (AMTSL): a qualitative study with midwives in Accra, Ghana.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2014Article
- Reproductive and newborn health.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study calculated the net benefit of using active management of the third stage of labour (AMTSL) rather than expectant management of the third stage of labour (EMTSL) for mothers in Guatemala and Zambia. Probabilities of events were derived from opinions of experts, publicly available data, and published literature. Costs of clinical events were calculated based on national price lists, observation of resources used in AMTSL and EMTSL, and expert estimates of resources used in managing postpartum haemorrhage and its complications, including transfusion. A decision tree was used for modelling expected costs associated with AMTSL or EMTSL. The base case analysis suggested a positive net benefit from AMTSL, with a net cost-saving of US $18,000 in Guatemala (with 100 lives saved) and US $145,000 in Zambia (with 467 lives saved) for 100,000 births. Facilities have strong economic incentives to adopt AMTSL if uterotonics are available.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17591351PMC3001158What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.