ArticleAnaesthesia reports
ObsTIVA-UK: a service evaluation of obstetric total intravenous anaesthesia in the United Kingdom.
Article in Anaesthesia reports. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Target-Controlled Infusion for Caesarean Delivery Under General Anesthesia: From Conventional Pharmacokinetic Models to Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Total Intravenous Anesthesia Using Target-Controlled Infusion with Propofol for Category 1 Emergency Cesarean Section in Patients with Preeclampsia with Severe Features.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We conducted a prospective observational service evaluation across the United Kingdom on the use of total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) for obstetric surgery between November 2022 and June 2023. The primary aim was to describe the incidence of TIVA for obstetric surgery within participating units, with secondary aims to describe maternal and neonatal postoperative recovery indicators. Of 184 maternity units in the United Kingdom, 30 (16%) contributed data to the service evaluation. There were 104 patients who underwent caesarean delivery under TIVA and 19 patients had TIVA for other reasons. Infusions of propofol and remifentanil were used in 100% and 84% of cases, respectively. Fifty-nine out of 103 live neonates (57%) required some form of respiratory support. Of the neonates with recorded data, 73% and 17% had Apgar scores < 7 at 1 and 5 min respectively. No neonates were recorded to have Apgar scores < 7 at 10 min. Further prospective research is required to investigate the impact of obstetric TIVA on maternal and neonatal outcomes and inform best practice recommendations.
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.