Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27998899›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2016

Effect of the type of maternal pushing during the second stage of labour on obstetric and neonatal outcome: a multicentre randomised trial-the EOLE study protocol.

Chloé Barasinski, Françoise Vendittelli

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02474745 (Effect of the Type of Maternal Pushing During the Second Stage of Labor on Obstetric and Neonatal Outcome), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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.

NCT02474745 nacompletednot on this map

Effect of the Type of Maternal Pushing During the Second Stage of Labor on Obstetric and Neonatal Outcome: a Multicenter Randomized Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Hospital, Clermont-FerrandRan2015 to 2017Enrolled256ConditionsDelivery, 2nd Stage of LaborArms- Directed open-glottis pushing, Directed closed-glottis pushing
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
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.

Chloé BarasinskiPôle Femme et Enfant, The Clermont-Ferrand University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Françoise VendittelliPôle Femme et Enfant, The Clermont-Ferrand University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Université Clermont Auvergne · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe scientific data currently available do not allow any definitive conclusion to be reached about what type of pushing should be recommended to women during the second stage of labour. The objective of this trial is to assess and compare the effectiveness of directed open-glottis pushing versus directed closed-glottis pushing. Secondary objectives are to assess, according to the type of pushing: immediate maternal and neonatal morbidity, intermediate-term maternal pelvic floor morbidity, uncomplicated birth, and women's satisfaction at 4 weeks post partum. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This multicentre randomised clinical trial compares directed closed-glottis pushing (Valsalva) versus directed open-glottis pushing during the second stage of labour in 4 hospitals of France. The study population includes pregnant women who received instruction in both types of pushing, have no previous caesarean delivery, are at term and have a vaginal delivery planned. Randomisation takes place during labour once cervical dilation ≥7 cm. The principal end point is assessed by a composite criterion: spontaneous delivery without perineal lesion (no episiotomy or spontaneous second-degree, third-degree or fourth-degree lacerations). We will need to recruit 125 women per group. The primary analysis will be by intention-to-treat analysis, with the principal results reported as crude relative risks (RRs) with their 95% CIs. A multivariate analysis will be performed to take prognostic and confounding factors into account to obtain adjusted RRs. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by a French Institutional Review Board (Comité de Protection des Personnes Sud Est 6:N°AU1168). Results will be reported in peer-reviewed journals and at scientific meetings. This study will make it possible to assess the effectiveness of 2 types of directed pushing used in French practice and to assess their potential maternal, fetal and neonatal effects. Findings from the study will be useful for counselling pregnant women before and during labour. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Agence national de sécurité du médicament et des produits de santé (ANSM): 150099B-22 and IDRCB: 2014-A01920-47. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02474745. Pre-result stage.

Indexed as

GlottisLabor, ObstetricObstetric Labor ComplicationsPhysical ExertionPregnancy OutcomeValsalva ManeuverAdolescentAdultDelivery, ObstetricEpisiotomyFemaleFranceHumansInfant, NewbornLacerationsParturitionEPIDEMIOLOGYNEONATOLOGYOBSTETRICS

Identifiers

PMID27998899
PMCPMC5223691
OpenAlexW2563236665

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.