Summary of findings 5. Ondansetron versus control.
| Ondansetron versus saline placebo for preventing hypotension during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section | |||||
| Patient or population: women having spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section Setting: hospital setting in Europe, North America, India, and the Middle East Intervention: ondansetron Comparison: saline placebo | |||||
| Outcomes | Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | № of participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | |
| Risk with control | Risk with ondansetron | ||||
| Maternal hypotension requiring intervention | Study population | RR 0.67 (0.54 to 0.83) | 740 (8 RCTs) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ Lowa,b | |
| 579 per 1000 | 388 per 1000 (313 to 481) | ||||
| Maternal hypertension requiring intervention | No studies reported this outcome. | ||||
| Maternal bradycardia requiring intervention | Study population | RR 0.49 (0.28 to 0.87) | 740 (8 RCTs) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ Lowa,b | |
| 100 per 1000 | 49 per 1000 (28 to 87) | ||||
| Maternal nausea and/or vomiting | Study population | RR 0.35 (0.24 to 0.51) | 653 (7 RCTs) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ Lowa,b | |
| 296 per 1000 | 103 per 1000 (71 to 151) | ||||
| Neonatal Apgar score < 8 at 5 minutes | Study population | Not estimable | 284 (3 RCTs) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ Lowa,b | |
| Not pooled | Not pooled | ||||
| Neonatal acidosis as defined by cord or neonatal blood with a pH < 7.2 | Study population | RR 0.48 (0.05 to 5.09) | 134 (2 RCT) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ Lowa,b | |
| 30 per 1000 | 15 per 1000 (2 to 154) | ||||
| Admission to neonatal care unit | No studies reported this outcome. | ||||
| *The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: confidence interval; RR: risk ratio. | |||||
|
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect. Moderate quality: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different. Low quality: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect. Very low quality: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect. | |||||
a Inclusion criteria not representative of wider population (e.g. elective caesarean section only) (−1). b Inadequate sample size (−1).