Trial reportJournal of pregnancy2014
Effects of continuous use of Entonox in comparison with intermittent method on obstetric outcomes: a randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in Journal of pregnancy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Metoclopramide role in preventing ileus after cesarean, a clinical trial.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2015Trial
- Relationship between COMT Gene Polymorphism, Anxiety, and Pain Perception during Labour.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Comparison of the outcomes of normal vaginal delivery with and without spinal anesthesia in mothers admitted to the maternity ward of Firoozabadi Hospital.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2022Article
- Childbirth Fear and Associated Factors in a Sample of Pregnant Iranian Women.Oman medical journal · 2018Article
- A comparison of the effects of ENTONOX inhalation and spinal anesthesia on labor pain reduction and apgar score in vaginal delivery: a clinical trial study.BioMedicine · 2018Article
- Effect of Entonox for pain management in labor: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Electronic physician · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEntonox (N2O2) which is an inhalational gas for relieving labor pain is commonly used intermittently; however some women are interested in continuous breathing in face mask. So we decided to compare the complications induced by two methods to find out whether it is safe to permit the mothers to use Entonox continuously or not. PATIENTS AND
methodsThis randomized clinical trial was performed in Mobini Hospital, Sabzevar, Iran. 50 parturients used Entonox intermittently and 50 cases used it continuously during labor. Then obstetrical outcomes were analyzed in two groups by spss 17 software, t-test, and Chi(2) while P < 0.05 was considered significant.
resultsThis study showed the mean duration of second stage of labor had no significant difference (P = 0.3). Perineal laceration was less in continuous group significantly (P = 0.04). Assisted vaginal birth was not different significantly (P = 0.4). Uterine atony had no significant difference in two groups (P = 0.2). Maternal collaboration in pushing and satisfaction were higher in continuous group significantly (P = 0.03), (P < 0.0001). Apgar score of neonates at first and fifth minute was acceptable and not different significantly in two groups (P = 0.3).
conclusionsOur study demonstrated continuous method is also safe. So, it seems reasonable to set mothers free to choose the desired method of Entonox usage.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.