SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2022
Effect of maternal positioning during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a systematic review and meta-analyses.
Synthesis in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Case for Standardized Maternal Cardiac Arrest Simulation Training in Prehospital and Hospital-Based Settings.O&G open · 2026Article
- Cardiac arrest in the pregnant patient - Using simulation to improve internal medicine resident competency.Resuscitation plus · 2025Article
- Clinical approach to respiratory failure in the obstetric patient: a comprehensive clinical review.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2025Review
- Impact of maternal posture on fetal physiology in human pregnancy: a narrative review.Frontiers in physiology · 2024Review
- Review
- Intralipid fails to rescue bupivacaine-induced cardiotoxicity in late-pregnant rats.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough rare, cardiac arrest during pregnancy is the leading cause of maternal death. Recently, its incidence has been increasing worldwide because more pregnant women have risk factors. The provision of early, high-quality cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) plays a major role in the increased likelihood of survival; therefore, it is important for clinicians to know how to manage it. Due to the aortocaval compression caused by the gravid uterus, clinical guidelines often emphasise the importance of maternal positioning during CPR, but there has been little evidence regarding which position is most effective.
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, and OpenGrey (updated on April 3, 2021). We included clinical trials and observational studies with reported outcomes related to successful resuscitations.
resultsWe included eight studies from the 1,490 screened. The eight studies were simulation-based, crossover trials that examine the quality of chest compressions. No data were available about the survival rates of mothers or foetuses/neonates. The meta-analyses showed that resuscitation of pregnant women in the 27°-30° left-lateral tilt position resulted in lower quality chest compressions. The difference is an 19% and 9% reduction in correct compression depth rate and correct hand position rate, respectively, compared with resuscitations in the supine position. Inexperienced clinicians find it difficult to perform chest compressions in the left-lateral tilt position.
conclusionsGiven that manual left uterine displacement allows the patient to remain supine, the resuscitation of women in the supine position using manual left uterine displacement should continue to be supported. Further research is needed to fill knowledge gaps regarding the effects of maternal positioning on clinical outcomes, such as survival rates following maternal cardiac arrest.
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.