ArticleJournal of anesthesia2026
Delivery-related charges of elective induction compared with on-demand epidural labor analgesia: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Journal of anesthesia, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeLabor analgesia is recommended for pain relief during childbirth. In settings with limited medical resources, elective induction with epidural analgesia is often adopted; however, this may increase healthcare costs and prolong hospitalization. The impact of different approaches to labor analgesia on delivery-related charges, epidural-to-delivery interval, and hospitalization remains unclear.
methodsThis retrospective study evaluated 252 full-term pregnant women who received epidural labor analgesia at a Japanese university hospital. Parturients were categorized into elective induction (EI) and on-demand (OD) groups. Inverse probability of treatment weighting with stabilized inverse propensity scores was applied to minimize bias. After adjusting for patient data, the mean ratios of the outcomes of interest for EI and OD were estimated using a generalized estimating equation. The primary outcome was delivery-related charges, while secondary outcomes included epidural-to-delivery interval and length of hospital stay.
resultsAmong eligible parturient, 62.3% (157/252) underwent EI, while 37.7% (95/252) received OD. After weighting, the mean delivery-related charges, epidural-to-delivery interval, and length of hospital stay were 621,380 yen, 37.0 h, and 7.5 days in the EI group, compared with 594,408 yen, 14.6 h, and 6.5 days in the OD group, respectively. The mean ratios (95% confidence interval) for delivery-related charges, epidural-to-delivery interval, and length of hospital stay were 1.04 (0.98, 1.10), 2.52 (1.90, 3.20), and 1.15 (1.08, 1.22), respectively.
conclusionElective induction with epidural labor analgesia was associated with longer labor duration and hospital stay, while no statistically significant difference in delivery-related charges was observed compared with the on-demand approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41973093What 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.