↓ Skip to main content

Acute tocolysis for uterine tachysystole or suspected fetal distress

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
16 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Acute tocolysis for uterine tachysystole or suspected fetal distress
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2018
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009770.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sebastian J Leathersich, Joshua P Vogel, Thach Son Tran, G Justus Hofmeyr

Abstract

Uterine tachysystole (more than 5 contractions per 10 minutes in 2 consecutive intervals) is common during labour, particularly with use of labour-stimulating agents. Tachysystole may reduce fetal oxygenation by interrupting maternal blood flow to the placenta during contractions. Reducing uterine contractions may improve placental blood flow, improving fetal oxygenation. This review aimed to evaluate the use of tocolytics to reduce or stop uterine contractions for improvement of the condition of the fetus in utero. This new review supersedes an earlier Cochrane Review on the same topic. To assess the effects of the use of acute tocolysis during labour for uterine tachysystole or suspected fetal distress, or both, on fetal, maternal and neonatal outcomes. We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (2 February 2018), and reference lists of retrieved studies. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating acute tocolysis for uterine tachysystole, intrapartum fetal distress, or both. We used standard methods expected by Cochrane. We included eight studies (734 women), conducted in hospital settings, predominantly in high-income countries (USA, Austria, Uruguay). Two trials were conducted in upper and lower middle-income countries (South Africa, Sri Lanka). The hospital facilities all had the capacity to perform caesarean section. Overall, the studies had a low risk of bias, except for methods to maintain blinding. All of the trials used a selective beta2 (ß2)-adrenergic agonist in one arm, however the drug used varied, as did the comparator. Limited information was available on maternal outcomes.Selective ß2-adrenergic agonist versus no tocolytic agent, whilst awaiting emergency deliveryThere were two stillbirths, both in the no tocolytic control group (risk ratio (RR) 0.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.01 to 4.55; 2 studies, 57 women; low-quality evidence). One had gross hydrocephalus and the second occurred with vaginal delivery after waiting 55 minutes for caesarean section. The decision for caesarean section delivery was an inclusion criterion in both studies so we could not assess this as an outcome under this comparison. Abnormal fetal heart trace is probably lower with tocolytic treatment (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.95; 2 studies, 43 women; moderate-quality evidence). The effects on the number of babies with Apgar score below seven were uncertain (low-quality evidence).Intravenous (IV) atosiban versus IV hexoprenaline (1 study, 26 women) One infant in the hexoprenaline group required > 24 hours in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) following a forceps delivery (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.50; low-quality evidence). There were no fetal or neonatal mortalities and no Apgar scores below seven. There was one caesarean delivery in the IV hexoprenaline group (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.50; low-quality evidence), and one case of abnormal fetal heart score in the atosiban group (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.13 to 67.51; very low-quality evidence).IV fenoterol bromhydrate versus emergency delivery (1 study, 390 women) No data were reported for perinatal death, severe morbidity or fetal or neonatal mortality. IV fenoterol probably increases the risk of caesarean delivery (RR 1.12, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.22; moderate-quality evidence). Fenoterol may have little or no effect on the risk of Apgar scores below seven (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.68; low-quality evidence).IV hexoprenaline versus no tocolytic agent, whilst awaiting emergency delivery (1 study, 37 women) No data were reported for perinatal death or severe morbidity. There were two fetal deaths in the no tocolytic control group (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.55; low-quality evidence). The rate of caesarean delivery was not reported. There were two babies with Apgar scores below seven in the control group and none in the hexoprenaline group (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.01 to 4.57; 35 women; low-quality evidence).Subcutaneous terbutaline versus IV magnesium sulphate (1 study, 46 women)No data were reported for perinatal death, severe morbidity or fetal or neonatal mortality. The decision for caesarean section was an inclusion criterion, so we could not assess this. The effects on abnormal fetal heart trace are uncertain (very low-quality evidence).Subcutaneous terbutaline with continuation of oxytocic infusion versus cessation of oxytocic infusion without tocolytic agent (1 study, 28 women) No data were reported for perinatal death, severe morbidity or fetal or neonatal mortality. There may be little or no difference in the rates of caesarean delivery in the subcutaneous terbutaline (8/15) and control groups (4/13) (RR 1.73, 95% CI 0.68 to 4.45; low-quality evidence). There were no cases of Apgar scores below seven or abnormal fetal heart trace.Subcutaneous terbutaline versus no tocolytic agent, whilst awaiting emergency delivery (1 study, 20 women) No data were reported for perinatal death or severe morbidity. There were no fetal or neonatal mortalities. The decision for caesarean section was an inclusion criterion, so we could not assess this. There were two babies with Apgar scores below seven in the control group and none in the terbutaline group (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.08; low-quality evidence).IV terbutaline versus IV nitroglycerin (1 study, 110 women)No data were reported for perinatal death or severe morbidity or fetal or neonatal mortality. There may be little or no difference in the rates of caesarean delivery between the IV terbutaline (30/57) and control groups (29/53) (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.36; low-quality evidence). There were no cases of Apgar scores below seven. There is insufficient evidence to determine the effects of tocolytics for uterine tachysystole or suspected fetal distress during labour. The clinical significance for some of the improvements in measures of fetal well-being with tocolytics is unclear. The sample sizes were too small to detect effects on neonatal morbidity, mortality or serious adverse effects. The majority of studies are from high-income countries in facilities with access to caesarean section, which may limit the generalisability of the results to lower-resource settings, or settings where caesarean section is not available.Further well-designed and adequately powered RCTs are required to evaluate clinically relevant indicators of maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 23%
Student > Bachelor 9 15%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 3 5%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 15 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 15%
Psychology 4 6%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 5%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 15 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 July 2018.
All research outputs
#1,394,698
of 13,255,897 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,988
of 10,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,422
of 267,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#87
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,255,897 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,537 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,487 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.