Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23421792›Full record

ReviewBMC pregnancy and childbirth2013

Misoprostol for postpartum hemorrhage prevention at home birth: an integrative review of global implementation experience to date.

Jeffrey Michael Smith, Rehana Gubin, Martine M Holston, Judith Fullerton, Ndola Prata

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
21.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Postpartum misoprostol for preventing maternal mortality and morbidity.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013
    Pooled it
  5. Cost-effectiveness of two interventions for the prevention of postpartum hemorrhage in Senegal.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2016
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jeffrey Michael SmithJhpiego, 1776 Massachusetts Ave,, NW#300, Washington, DC 20036, USA. jsmith@jhpiego.net
Rehana Gubin
Martine M Holston
Judith Fullerton
Ndola Prata
Jacobson Holman (United States) · USUniversity of California, Berkeley · USUniversity of California, San Diego · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHemorrhage continues to be a leading cause of maternal death in developing countries. The 2012 World Health Organization guidelines for the prevention and management of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) recommend oral administration of misoprostol by community health workers (CHWs). However, there are several outstanding questions about distribution of misoprostol for PPH prevention at home births.

methodsWe conducted an integrative review of published research studies and evaluation reports from programs that distributed misoprostol at the community level for prevention of PPH at home births. We reviewed methods and cadres involved in education of end-users, drug administration, distribution, and coverage, correct and incorrect usage, and serious adverse events.

resultsEighteen programs were identified; only seven reported all data of interest. Programs utilized a range of strategies and timings for distributing misoprostol. Distribution rates were higher when misoprostol was distributed at a home visit during late pregnancy (54.5-96.9%) or at birth (22.5-83.6%), compared to antenatal care (ANC) distribution at any ANC visit (22.5-49.1%) or late ANC visit (21.0-26.7%). Coverage rates were highest when CHWs and traditional birth attendants distributed misoprostol and lower when health workers/ANC providers distributed the medication. The highest distribution and coverage rates were achieved by programs that allowed self-administration. Seven women took misoprostol prior to delivery out of more than 12,000 women who were followed-up. Facility birth rates increased in the three programs for which this information was available. Fifty-one (51) maternal deaths were reported among 86,732 women taking misoprostol: 24 were attributed to perceived PPH; none were directly attributed to use of misoprostol. Even if all deaths were attributable to PPH, the equivalent ratio (59 maternal deaths/100,000 live births) is substantially lower than the reported maternal mortality ratio in any of these countries.

conclusionsCommunity-based programs for prevention of PPH at home birth using misoprostol can achieve high distribution and use of the medication, using diverse program strategies. Coverage was greatest when misoprostol was distributed by community health agents at home visits. Programs appear to be safe, with an extremely low rate of ante- or intrapartum administration of the medication.

Indexed as

MisoprostolOxytocicsCommunity Health WorkersDeveloping CountriesFemaleHome ChildbirthHumansMaternal MortalityMidwiferyPostpartum HemorrhagePractice Guidelines as TopicPregnancySelf AdministrationWorld Health OrganizationMisoprostolOxytocics

Identifiers

PMID23421792
PMCPMC3598986
OpenAlexW2115453645

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.