Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30445929›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2018

Differences between evidence-based recommendations and actual clinical practice regarding tocolysis: a prospective multicenter registry study.

Emina Nazifovic, Heinrich Husslein, Ioana Lakovschek, Florian Heinzl, Elisabeth Wenzel-Schwarz, Philipp Klaritsch, Ekrem Kilic, Sarah Hoesel, Rudolf Bind, Magdalena Pabinger and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Emina NazifovicDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Semmelweis Frauenklinik, Bastiengasse 36-38, A-, 1180, Vienna, Austria.
Heinrich HussleinDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, A-, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Ioana LakovschekDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 14, A - 8036 Graz, Graz, Austria.
Florian HeinzlDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, A-, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Elisabeth Wenzel-SchwarzDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, St. Josef Krankenhaus, Auhofstrasse 189, A-, 1130, Vienna, Austria.
Philipp KlaritschDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of Graz, Auenbruggerplatz 14, A - 8036 Graz, Graz, Austria.
Ekrem KilicDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Medical University of Krems, University Hospital of Tulln, Alter Ziegelweg 10, A-3430, Tulln, Austria.
Sarah HoeselDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Klinikum Klagenfurt am Wörthersee, Feschnigstraße 11, A-, 9020, Klagenfurt am Wörthersee, Austria.
Rudolf BindDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Landesklinikum Zwettl, Probstei 5, A-, 3910, Zwettl, Austria.
Magdalena PabingerDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Krankenanstalt Rudolfstiftung, Juchgasse 25, A-, 1030, Vienna, Austria.
Harald ZeislerDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, A-, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Lorenz KuesselDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, A-, 1090, Vienna, Austria. lorenz.kuessel@meduniwien.ac.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4718-4954
Medical University of Vienna · ATMedical University of Graz · ATKlinikum Klagenfurt · ATKrankenanstalt Rudolfstiftung der Stadt Wien · ATUniversitätsklinikum Tulln · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInternational guidelines recommend that tocolytic therapy be restricted to a single 48-h application. However, multiple cycles of tocolytic therapy and maintenance therapy that exceeds 48 h appear to play a role in daily clinical practice. We aimed to evaluate current trends in clinical practice with respect to treatment with tocolytic agents and to identify differences between evidence-based recommendations and daily clinical practice in Austria.

methodsA prospective multicenter registry study was conducted from October 2013 through April 2015 in ten obstetrical departments in Austria. Women ≥18 years of age who received tocolytic therapy following a diagnosis of threatened preterm birth were included, and details were obtained regarding clinical characteristics, tocolytic therapy, and pregnancy outcome.

resultsA total of 309 women were included. We observed a median of 2 cycles of tocolytic therapy per patient (IQR 1-3) with a median duration of 2 days per cycle (IQR 2-5). Repeat tocolysis was administered in 41.7% of women, resulting in up to six tocolysis cycles; moreover, 40.8% of the first tocolysis cycles were maintenance tocolysis (i.e., longer than 48 h). Only 25.6% of women received one single 48-h tocolysis cycle in which they received antenatal corticosteroids for fetal lung maturation in accordance evidence-based recommendations.

conclusionsHere, we report a clear disparity between evidence-based recommendations and daily practice with respect to tocolysis. We believe that the general practice of prescribing tocolytic therapy must be revisited. Furthermore, our findings highlight the need for contemporary studies designed to investigate the effectiveness of performing maintenance and/or repetitive tocolysis treatment.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAustriaFemaleGuideline AdherenceHumansObstetric Labor, PrematurePractice Guidelines as TopicPractice Patterns, Physicians'PregnancyPregnancy OutcomePremature BirthProspective StudiesRegistriesTocolysisTocolytic AgentsTocolytic Agents

Identifiers

PMID30445929
PMCPMC6240217
OpenAlexW2900838606

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.