Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25272330›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2014

Antibiotics prior to amniotomy for reducing infectious morbidity in mother and infant.

Amita Ray, Sujoy Ray

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 95% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Amita RayDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Srinivas Medical College, Mukka, Surathkal, Mangalore, India, 574146.
Sujoy Ray
Kasturba Medical College, Manipal · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAmniotomy (the deliberate rupture of membranes) was described almost two centuries ago and since then has been used both for induction and augmentation of labour - which are common obstetric practices. Trends have shown a rise in the induction rates over the last decade and data suggest that the rate of labour inductions is increasing faster than the rate of pregnancy complications. Recent years have seen the emergence of a variety of other methods of induction of labour but amniotomy combined with oxytocin infusion remains the most commonly used method of augmentation of labour. The newer agents for induction are expensive and in resource-poor settings amniotomy is still the chosen method for both induction and augmentation.As with any invasive procedure amniotomy can lead to infection, ascending from the vagina into the uterine cavity and can contribute significantly to both maternal and neonatal infectious morbidity.

objectivesThe objective of this review was to evaluate the prophylactic use of antibiotics versus placebo or no treatment prior to amniotomy on maternal and neonatal infectious morbidity and mortality. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 August 2014), the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov (12 September 2014). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials or cluster-randomised trials comparing antibiotics prior to amniotomy versus placebo (or no treatment) were eligible for inclusion in this review but none were identified. Quasi-randomised trials or cross-over trials were not eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed one trial report for inclusion. In future updates of this review, two review authors will independently assess risk of bias and carry out data extraction. Data will be checked for accuracy. MAIN

resultsWe identified one trial report but this was excluded. No studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. AUTHORS'

conclusionsHigh-quality trials are needed to justify or refute the routine use of antibiotics at amniotomy for prevention of infection in the mother and infant.Future studies should be conducted, especially in resource-constrained settings where amniotomy is still used as a means of induction of labour, in order to evaluate the routine use of antibiotics at amniotomy in these settings. Future research in this area should include important maternal and infant outcomes listed in this review and also consider cost effectiveness and side effects of antibiotic use, including the emergence of antibiotic-resistant strains.

Indexed as

AmnionAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacterial InfectionsFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornInfant, Newborn, DiseasesLabor, InducedPregnancyPregnancy Complications, InfectiousAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID25272330
PMCPMC10549958
OpenAlexW1551104361

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.