ArticleJournal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology
Enhanced recovery after cesarean (ERAC) versus conventional care: An expanded systematic review and meta-analysis of 18,368 subjects.
Article in Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Impact of DRG Review Teams on Obstetric Disease Management and Cost Control: A Variance Analysis Approach.The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research · 2026Article
- Retrolaminar versus erector spinae plane block for enhanced recovery after cesarean section: a retrospective study.Perioperative medicine (London, England) · 2026Article
- Postpartum pain management for women undergoing cesarean sections using a multimodal pain control protocol: a retrospective study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Enhanced recovery after cesarean (ERAC) is an interdisciplinary approach to improve patient outcomes following cesarean section. ERAC's execution must be constantly evaluated. Thus, we aimed to analyze parameters associated with ERAC adoption for clinical care in this expanded systematic review. Material and Methods: A systematic literature search using Epistemonikos, Google Scholar, PubMed, and Scopus was done until February 2023. The appropriate observational and experimental research comparing the effects of ERAC protocols with conventional care on postoperative adverse events, operation-related characteristics, time to first (oral intake, mobilization, bowel movement, and urinary catheter removal), and opioid use. Meta-analyses were conducted using the RevMan 5.4.1. and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis version 3.3 software. Results: In total, 23 studies were included in this systematic review. ERAC implementation was found to be associated with improvement in terms of shorter postoperative hospital stays and faster time to first liquid intake, first solid diet, urinary catheter removal, and mobilization. Furthermore, the rate of opioid-free treatment, total in-hospital morphine milligram equivalent (MME), daily in-hospital MME, and total prescribed opioid pills at discharge (all parameters, Conclusion: ERAC implementation is associated with better healthcare delivery, as determined by shorter time to first, lower opioid consumption, and shorter postoperative length of stay compared with conventional care. However, it is not associated with a lower dosage of opioid prescription at discharge.
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.