Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35934529›Full record

SynthesisBritish journal of anaesthesia2022

Interventions for the prevention or treatment of epidural-related maternal fever: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Anna Cartledge, Daniel Hind, Mike Bradburn, Marrissa Martyn-St James, Sophie Davenport, Wei Shao Tung, Hwu Yung, Jeyinn Wong, Matthew Wilson

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in British journal of anaesthesia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Development and validation of a multivariable logistic regression model for predicting epidural-related maternal fever during labor analgesia: A retrospective cohort study.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anna CartledgeSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Daniel HindSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. Electronic address: d.hind@sheffield.ac.uk.
Mike BradburnSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Marrissa Martyn-St JamesSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Sophie DavenportSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Wei Shao TungThe Medical School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Hwu YungGeneral Surgery, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Trust Headquarters, Nottingham, UK.
Jeyinn WongGeneral Surgery, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Trust Headquarters, Nottingham, UK.
Matthew WilsonSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
University of Sheffield · GBNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEpidural-related maternal fever in women in labour has consequences for the mother and neonate. There has been no systematic review of preventive strategies.

methodsRCTs evaluating methods of preventing or treating epidural-related maternal fever in women in active labour were eligible. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and grey literature sources were searched from inception to April 2021. Two review authors independently undertook study selection. Data extraction and quality assessment was performed by a single author and checked by a second. The Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool was used. Meta-analyses for the primary outcome, incidence of intrapartum fever, were performed using the DerSimonian and Laird random effects model to produce summary risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).

resultsForty-two records, representing 34 studies, were included. Methods of reduced dose epidural reduced the incidence of intrapartum fever, but this was not statistically significant when six trials at high risk of bias were removed (seven trials; 857 participants; RR=0.83; 95% CI, 0.41-1.67). Alternative methods of analgesia and high-dose prophylactic systemic steroids reduced the risk of intrapartum fever compared with epidural analgesia. Prophylactic paracetamol was not effective.

conclusionsThere is no clear evidence to support the use of any individual preventative or therapeutic intervention for epidural-related maternal fever. Further research should focus on understanding the mechanism of fever development to enable RCTs of potential interventions to reduce the incidence of intrapartum fever development and the subsequent disease burden felt by the neonate. CLINICAL

trial registrationCRD42021246929.

Indexed as

Analgesia, EpiduralAnalgesia, ObstetricalLabor, ObstetricFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornPregnancyepidural feverepidural-related maternal feverintrapartum feverlabour analgesialabour epiduralperinatal analgesia

Identifiers

PMID35934529
PMCPMC9575042
OpenAlexW4289993618

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.