ArticleJNMA; journal of the Nepal Medical Association2024
Cesarean Section under General Anesthesia over 10 Years at Tertiary Care Center: A Descriptive Cross-sectional Study.
Article in JNMA; journal of the Nepal Medical Association, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The global surge in cesarean deliveries necessitates safe anesthetic practices to optimize outcomes. While the neuraxial block is the preferred method, specific conditions warrant general anesthesia. This study is aimed to determine the prevalence of cesarean sections under general anesthesia at a tertiary care center. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted on cesarean sections performed between April 14, 2013, and April 13, 2023, at a tertiary care center. Ethical approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Committee (Reference number: 20092023/01). Total sampling was done. Data for the past ten years were manually collected from hospital records using a self-structured proforma and analyzed using Microsoft Excel 2018 and IBM SPSS version 26. The point estimate and 95% confidence interval were calculated for the study. Results: In this study, there were 216 (2.98%) (95% CI: 2.59-3.38%) cesarean sections under general anesthesia in 10 years. Notably, among them, there were 103 (47.69%) primigravida, nullipara 130 (60.19%), 135 (62.50%) with no living children, and 161 (74.54%) without any past abortions. In most cases, 182 (84.26%) were emergency procedures and 34 (15.74%) were elective. Fetal bradycardia with distress was the primary indication observed in 121 (56.02%) cases, followed by 32 (14.81%) maternal requests. Additionally, 21 (2.66%) cases were found initially planned as cesarean sections under subarachnoid block but were converted to general anesthesia. The prevalence in this study was found within the recommended limits. Conclusions: The findings highlight that the majority of these procedures were emergency cases, predominantly due to fetal distress, with a notable proportion involving primigravida and nulliparous women.
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.