Key result
Analysis of 284 published trials demonstrated wide variation in techniques for assessing block height for caesarean section, with only 40.5% of papers describing the method of assessing motor block.
Why the study?
What are the trends in methods used to assess the height of block for caesarean section in published literature and textbooks over the past three decades?
Population
284 published randomized clinical trials and 45 editions of 7 anaesthetic textbooks regarding caesarean…
Design
Systematic_review
Authors
Loading...
Inconsistent block assessment methods limit reliable trial comparisons; challenges consensus on standard techniques for caesarean section.
Systematic Review (n=284)
What are the trends in methods used to assess the height of block for caesarean section in published literature and textbooks over the past three decades?
There is wide variation and little consensus in published trials and textbooks regarding the methods for assessing block height for caesarean section.
Hoyle et al. (2014) conducted a systematic review in Caesarean section under regional anaesthesia (n=284). Methods of block assessment was evaluated on Methods of assessment of sensory and motor block, and the height of block deemed adequate for surgery. Analysis of 284 published trials demonstrated wide variation in techniques for assessing block height for caesarean section, with only 40.5% of papers describing the method of assessing motor block.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: