SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2026
A systematic review and meta-analysis on labour pain management methods utilization and its associated factors among obstetric caregivers in Ethiopia.
Synthesis in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite growing attention to maternal health, labour pain management remains a neglected aspect of obstetric care in Ethiopia. Existing studies in Ethiopia on labour pain management among obstetric caregivers (OCGs) provide some insights; their findings are often inconsistent, geographically limited, and lack national representativeness. We therefore conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the utilization of labour pain management methods and associated factors among obstetric caregivers in Ethiopia.
methodsThis review included all observational, full-text, English-language, published, and gray studies that reported on labour pain management practices or associated factors among obstetric caregivers in Ethiopia, searched from July 1-September 12/2025. Studies were identified via a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, PUBMED, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Google Scholar, CINAHL, SCOPUS, and a direct Google search of international databases. Methodological quality and heterogeneity among the included studies was assessed using the Hoy D et al. risk of bias tool & I² statistic, respectively. Publication bias was checked using Egger's and funnel plots. All statistical analyses were conducted using STATA version 17.0.
resultsHalf of the included studies were rated as high quality. About 45.18% of OCGs utilized labour pain management methods (95% CI: 39.87-50.48). Utilization was higher among female OCGs (Adjusted Odd Ratio [AOR] = 1.90; 95% CI: 1.24-2.93), midwives (AOR = 1.50; 95% CI: 1.15-1.94), having adequate knowledge of labour pain (AOR = 2.61; 95% CI: 1.51-4.53), having received training on labour pain management (AOR = 3.05; 95% CI: 2.17-4.30), working in facilities with adequate supplies (AOR = 5.43; 95% CI: 2.90-10.14), the presence of labour pain management protocol (AOR = 2.06; 95% CI: 1.46-2.90), and perceiving of labour pain as moderate to severe (AOR = 2.21; 95% CI: 1.40-3.49).
conclusionFewer than one in two OCGs utilized labour pain management methods. Individual caregiver characteristics (sex, profession, knowledge) and institutional factors (protocols, supplies, training) were associated with labour pain relief utilization among obstetric caregivers.
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.