Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38634663›Full record

ArticleThe Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology2024

Obstetrician views on Fetal Pillow® device use and research in Aotearoa New Zealand: A cross-sectional survey.

Lynn Sadler, Robin Cronin, Erena Browne, Amanda Harvey, Meghan G Hill

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Lynn SadlerWomen's Health, Te Whatu Ora Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0003-0681-6652
Robin CroninTe Whatu Ora Counties Manukau, Auckland, New Zealand.
Erena BrowneWomen's Health, Te Whatu Ora Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Amanda HarveyWomen's Health, Te Whatu Ora Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Meghan G HillDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-4096-5339
Auckland District Health Board · NZCounties Manukau District Health Board · NZUniversity of Auckland · NZ

Funding

Health Research Council of New Zealand 22/016
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is anecdotal evidence of Fetal Pillow® use, but no formal local information on clinician practices and perspectives.

aimsTo assess obstetrician use of the Fetal Pillow®, knowledge of relevant research, and interest in a proposed randomised controlled trial in Aotearoa New Zealand. MATERIALS AND

methodsAnonymous cross-sectional survey of practising obstetricians and obstetric trainees in Aotearoa New Zealand distributed by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.

resultsOf 136 respondents (69% specialists and 31% trainees), 130 had heard of the Fetal Pillow® device, and 108 had used it at least once (43% more than ten times). The device was available in 17/21 units represented. The 108 users of the device reported this was most commonly on collegial advice (63%) or after personal experience of a difficult delivery (33%) and most (80%) believed it reduced maternal morbidity. Only around one-third of the 130 respondents who had heard of the device agreed there was adequate research demonstrating its efficacy for maternal (36%) and neonatal (30%) morbidity. The majority reported they would change practice in response to a randomised trial, although they were more likely to start use (81% of current non-users) than stop (53% of users). Most (70%) respondents agreed they would encourage patients to participate in a randomised trial.

conclusionsThe Fetal Pillow® is available in most maternity units in Aotearoa New Zealand. The majority of obstetric clinicians believe it reduces maternal morbidity, while acknowledging the lack of scientific evidence. Most would support a randomised trial.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelObstetricsAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleNew ZealandObstetriciansPractice Patterns, Physicians'PregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSurveys and Questionnaireslabourmaternal morbidityneonatal morbidityobstetricssurvey

Identifiers

PMID38634663
PMCPMC11660025
OpenAlexW4394918620

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.