Observational studyBrazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier)
Forced-air warming and continuous core temperature monitoring with zero-heat-flux thermometry during cesarean section: a retrospective observational cohort study.
Observational study in Brazilian journal of anesthesiology (Elsevier). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Temperature Dysregulation Following Intrathecal Morphine for Cesarean Delivery Patients-A Scoping Review.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Article
- Construction of a Nomogram Prediction Model for Intraoperative Shivering During Caesarean Section.International journal of women's health · 2025Article
- Agreement between three noninvasive temperature monitoring devices during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean delivery: a prospective observational study.Journal of clinical monitoring and computing · 2024Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOver 30% of parturients undergoing spinal anesthesia for cesarean section become intraoperatively hypothermic. This study assessed the magnitude of hypothermic insult in parturients and newborns using continuous, high-resolution thermometry and evaluated the efficiency of intraoperative forced-air warming for prevention of hypothermia.
methodsOne hundred and eleven parturients admitted for elective or emergency cesarean section under spinal anesthesia with newborn bonding over a 5-month period were included in this retrospective observational cohort study. Patients were divided into two groups: the passive insulation group, who received no active warming, and the active warming group, who received convective warming through an underbody blanket. Core body temperature was continuously monitored by zero-heat-flux thermometry and automatically recorded by data-loggers. The primary outcome was the incidence of hypothermia in the operating and recovery room. Neonatal outcomes were also analyzed.
resultsThe patients in the passive insulation group had significantly lower temperatures in the operating room compared to the actively warmed group (36.4°C vs. 36.6°C, p = 0.005), including temperature at skin closure (36.5°C vs. 36.7°C, p = 0.017). The temperature of the newborns after discharge from the postanesthetic care unit was lower in the passive insulation group (36.7°C vs. 37.0°C, p = 0.002); thirteen (15%) of the newborns were hypothermic, compared to three (4%) in the active warming group (p < 0.01).
conclusionForced-air warming decreases perioperative hypothermia in parturients undergoing cesarean section but does not entirely prevent hypothermia in newborns while bonding. Therefore, it can be effectively used for cesarean section, but special attention should be given to neonates.
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.