Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28413274›Full record

ArticleJournal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology

Evaluation of decision-to-delivery interval in emergency cesarean section: A 1-year prospective audit in a tertiary care hospital.

Sunanda Gupta, Udita Naithani, C Madhanmohan, Ajay Singh, Pradeep Reddy, Apoorva Gupta

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Observational
  16. 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

6 authors.

Sunanda GuptaDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Geetanjali Medical College, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India.
Udita NaithaniDepartment of Anethesiology, Critical Care and Pain Management, R.N.T. Medical College, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India.
C MadhanmohanDepartment of Anethesiology, Critical Care and Pain Management, R.N.T. Medical College, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India.
Ajay SinghDepartment of Anethesiology, Critical Care and Pain Management, R.N.T. Medical College, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India.
Pradeep ReddyDepartment of Anethesiology, Critical Care and Pain Management, R.N.T. Medical College, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India.
Apoorva GuptaDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Geetanjali Medical College, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsThe American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) committee on professional standards and the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines suggest that decision-to-delivery interval (DDI) and emergency cesarean section (CS) should not be more than 30 min, and a delay of more than75 min in the presence of maternal or fetal compromise can lead to poor outcome. This prospective 1-year study was conducted on emergency CS in a tertiary care hospital to evaluate the DDI, factors affecting it and to analyze their effects on maternal and neonatal outcome. MATERIAL AND

methodsA structured proforma was used to analyze the data from all women undergoing emergency CS, during a 1-year period, included in Category 1 and 2 of NICE guidelines for CS.

resultsA total of 453 emergency CSs were evaluated, with a mean DDI of 36.3 ± 17.2 min for Category 1 CS and 38.1 ± 17.7 min for Category 2 CS (

conclusionFailure to meet the current recommendations was associated with adverse maternal outcomes, but not with adverse neonatal outcome.

Indexed as

decision-to-delivery intervalDecision-to-delivery intervalemergency cesarean sectionmaternal outcomeneonatal outcome

Identifiers

PMID28413274
PMCPMC5374832

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.