ArticlePregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.)2026
Chorioamnionitis treatment for women with isolated intrapartum fever: A cost-effectiveness analysis.
Article in Pregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.), 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
Objective: Intrapartum fever (≥38°C) occurs in many laboring patients annually in the United States, but whether an isolated fever should be treated as chorioamnionitis remains controversial. Antibiotic treatment may help reduce the impact of infection as compared to expectant management but may lead to other complications and increase costs. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of treating isolated intrapartum fever as chorioamnionitis. Methods: We constructed a decision-analytic model in TreeAge Pro to compare outcomes between expectant management and antibiotic treatment with ampicillin/gentamicin for isolated intrapartum fever. Our theoretical cohort was 222,000 patients, representing laboring patients with an intrapartum temperature ≥38°C in the United States annually. Outcomes were postpartum endometritis, neonatal early-onset sepsis (nEOS), neonatal death, neonatal neurodevelopmental delay (NDD), acute kidney injury (AKI) from gentamicin toxicity, costs, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). We calculated the incremental cost per QALY ratio with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. We discounted QALYs at a rate of 3%. Model inputs were derived from literature and assessed using univariate sensitivity analyses. Results: In our theoretical cohort of 222,000 individuals with a fever in labor, antibiotic treatment reduced 7481 cases of postpartum endometritis (8649 vs. 16,131), 6047 cases of nEOS (961 vs. 7009), 71 fewer neonatal deaths (1254 vs. 1325), and 415 fewer cases of NDD (15,498 vs. 15,913) compared to expectant management. However, gentamicin use for chorioamnionitis resulted in 6036 more cases of AKI (8802 vs. 2766). Treating intrapartum fever as chorioamnionitis decreased costs and increased QALYs at baseline; thus, it was a dominant strategy. In the Monte Carlo multivariable probabilistic simulation, treating intrapartum fever with antibiotics proved cost-effective in 99.94% of trials, indicating that the cost-effectiveness of this strategy was robust to variation in the underlying variables. Conclusion: Treating intrapartum fever with antibiotics is a cost-effective strategy to reduce the adverse outcomes of untreated intrapartum fever. Adopting a protocol to treat all intrapartum fevers ≥38°C as chorioamnionitis with appropriate antibiotics may lead to improved outcomes and reduced costs.
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.