Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35089544›Full record

ArticleCanadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie2022

A survey of labour epidural practices at obstetric anesthesia fellowship programs in the United States.

Elliott Callahan, Peter Yeh, Brendan Carvalho, Ronald B George

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Response to "a standardized algorithm for assessing labor analgesia".Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2025
    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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elliott CallahanDepartment of Anesthesia and Perioperative Care, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), 513 Parnassus Ave, MSB, 436, Box 0427, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA. elliott.callahan@ucsf.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9416-6428
Peter YehDepartment of Anesthesia and Perioperative Care, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), 513 Parnassus Ave, MSB, 436, Box 0427, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
Brendan CarvalhoStanford University, Palo Alto, CA, USA.
Ronald B GeorgeDepartment of Anesthesia and Perioperative Care, University of California San Francisco (UCSF), 513 Parnassus Ave, MSB, 436, Box 0427, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
University of California, San Francisco · USPalo Alto University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeLabour epidural analgesia (LEA) is an evolving field. Various neuraxial techniques and dosing regimens are available to the modern obstetric anesthesia provider, allowing for significant practice variability. To begin a search for consensus on optimal care, we sought to query fellowship training practices for LEA.

methodsWe conducted an electronic survey of institutions with American Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited obstetric anesthesiology fellowship programs. We studied the frequency of epidural initiation techniques, including combined spinal epidural (CSE), dural puncture epidural, and epidural bolus. For maintenance techniques, we appraised the use of continuous epidural infusion, programmed intermittent bolus (PIEB), and patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA).

resultsOf 40 institutions surveyed, we received 32 responses (80% response rate). Twenty-eight of 40 (70%) were included in the analysis. A plurality of institutions (12/28; 43%) preferred CSE, and among those who used CSE, 23/27 (85%) included intrathecal opioids. A majority of institutions used protocols with PIEB (55%), while almost all (92%) used PCEA. Most participants (88%) reported using dilute concentration maintenance infusions of 0.1% bupivacaine/ropivacaine or less.

conclusionDespite significant variability in LEA practice, some clear patterns emerged in our survey, including preference for opioid-containing CSE and maintenance with PIEB, PCEA, and dilute epidural solutions.

Indexed as

Analgesia, EpiduralAnalgesia, ObstetricalAnesthesia, ObstetricalLabor, ObstetricAnalgesia, Patient-ControlledAnalgesicsAnesthetics, LocalFellowships and ScholarshipsFemaleHumansPregnancyUnited StatesAnalgesicsAnesthetics, Localfellowshipslabourneuraxialprotocolsurvey

Identifiers

PMID35089544
PMCPMC9068633
OpenAlexW4210651629

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.