ArticleAnaesthesia2025
Views of people who have given birth on the environmental and occupational exposure risks of nitrous oxide for labour analgesia: an interview-based qualitative study.
Article in Anaesthesia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The 0.00015 degree problem: learning from the environmental debates around desflurane.Anaesthesia · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionA 50:50 nitrous oxide/oxygen mix is commonly used for labour analgesia in the UK; however, nitrous oxide is associated with comparatively high environmental impact and potential exposure risks to staff if appropriate measures are not taken. Reduction of the impact of nitrous oxide in line with net zero emissions targets would require widespread changes in the way nitrous oxide is administered or in the availability of alternative options for labour analgesia. The aims of this qualitative study were to understand nitrous oxide use from the perspective of the parturient in the context of concerns regarding the environment and occupational exposure, and to provide evidence to guide the development of patient-centred nitrous oxide mitigation strategies.
methodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with participants who had used nitrous oxide for labour analgesia. Participants were recruited purposively. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.
resultsWe conducted 12 interviews and identified three themes: nitrous oxide is the default for labour analgesia in the UK; mitigating nitrous oxide harm depends on personal priorities; and institutions have a responsibility to mitigate nitrous oxide harm. Participants viewed nitrous oxide as a safe option, readily available in the context of limited choices for labour analgesia. They would be interested to know about the environmental risk of nitrous oxide, though this would not necessarily influence their choice to use it. They were less interested in its occupational risks and considered institutions, rather than individuals in labour, to have a responsibility to mitigate these. Though they felt that investment in reducing NHS emissions is important, participants also felt there may be other more pressing financial priorities. DISCUSSION: This study provides evidence to support the development of strategies to reduce nitrous oxide emissions, which consider the views of people who have used nitrous oxide for labour analgesia.
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.