Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

'Risk of bias' graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

'Risk of bias' graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 1 Postoperative febrile morbidity.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 1 Postoperative febrile morbidity.

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 2 Postoperative analgesia on demand.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 2 Postoperative analgesia on demand.

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 3 Time between surgery and first dose of analgesic (hours).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 3 Time between surgery and first dose of analgesic (hours).

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 4 Total dose of analgesics in 24 hours.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 4 Total dose of analgesics in 24 hours.

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 8 Estimated blood loss (mL).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 8 Estimated blood loss (mL).

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 10 Blood transfusion.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.10

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 10 Blood transfusion.

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 11 Wound infection as defined by trial authors.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.11

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 11 Wound infection as defined by trial authors.

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 16 Time (hours) from surgery to start of breastfeeding.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.16

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 16 Time (hours) from surgery to start of breastfeeding.

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 17 Total operative time (minutes).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.17

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 17 Total operative time (minutes).

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 18 Need for re‐laparotomy.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.18

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 18 Need for re‐laparotomy.

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 21 Delivery time (minutes).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.21

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 21 Delivery time (minutes).

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 23 Admissions to special care baby unit ‐ all types.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.23

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 23 Admissions to special care baby unit ‐ all types.

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 24 Admission to special care baby unit ‐ emergency caesarean section.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.24

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 24 Admission to special care baby unit ‐ emergency caesarean section.

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 25 Postoperative hospital stay for mother (days).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.25

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 25 Postoperative hospital stay for mother (days).

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 26 Stay in special care nursery (days).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.26

Comparison 1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 26 Stay in special care nursery (days).

Comparison 2 Muscle‐cutting/Maylard versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 1 Postoperative febrile morbidity.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Muscle‐cutting/Maylard versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 1 Postoperative febrile morbidity.

Comparison 2 Muscle‐cutting/Maylard versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 2 Blood transfusion.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Muscle‐cutting/Maylard versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 2 Blood transfusion.

Comparison 2 Muscle‐cutting/Maylard versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 3 Wound infection as defined by trial authors.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Muscle‐cutting/Maylard versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 3 Wound infection as defined by trial authors.

Comparison 2 Muscle‐cutting/Maylard versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 4 Long‐term complication ‐ physical test at 3 months (Janda's test).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Muscle‐cutting/Maylard versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 4 Long‐term complication ‐ physical test at 3 months (Janda's test).

Comparison 2 Muscle‐cutting/Maylard versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 5 Postoperative hospital stay for mother (days).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.5

Comparison 2 Muscle‐cutting/Maylard versus Pfannenstiel incision, Outcome 5 Postoperative hospital stay for mother (days).

Comparison 1. Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Postoperative febrile morbidity Show forest plot

2

411

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.35 [0.14, 0.87]

1.1 Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision

2

411

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.35 [0.14, 0.87]

2 Postoperative analgesia on demand Show forest plot

1

101

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.55 [0.40, 0.76]

3 Time between surgery and first dose of analgesic (hours) Show forest plot

1

101

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.80 [0.12, 1.48]

4 Total dose of analgesics in 24 hours Show forest plot

1

101

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.89 [‐1.19, ‐0.59]

5 Number of analgesic injections required

0

0

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6 Duration of analgesics (hours)

0

0

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7 Number of analgesic doses required

0

0

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

8 Estimated blood loss (mL) Show forest plot

1

101

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐58.0 [‐108.51, ‐7.49]

9 Change in pre‐ and postoperative haemoglobin levels (g)

0

0

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10 Blood transfusion Show forest plot

1

310

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

11 Wound infection as defined by trial authors Show forest plot

1

310

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.56 [0.45, 5.42]

12 Wound haematoma

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

13 Postoperative pain absent on day 1

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

14 Postoperative pain absent on day 2

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

15 "Significant" postoperative pain by visual analogue score

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

16 Time (hours) from surgery to start of breastfeeding Show forest plot

1

101

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐5.5 [‐13.62, 2.62]

17 Total operative time (minutes) Show forest plot

1

101

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐11.40 [‐16.55, ‐6.25]

18 Need for re‐laparotomy Show forest plot

1

310

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

19 Long‐term "significant" wound pain assessed by visual analogue score

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

20 Not satisfied with wound

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

21 Delivery time (minutes) Show forest plot

1

101

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.90 [‐2.53, ‐1.27]

22 5‐minute Apgar score less than 7

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

23 Admissions to special care baby unit ‐ all types Show forest plot

1

310

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.19 [0.44, 3.20]

24 Admission to special care baby unit ‐ emergency caesarean section Show forest plot

1

98

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.45 [0.54, 3.86]

25 Postoperative hospital stay for mother (days) Show forest plot

1

101

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐1.5 [‐2.16, ‐0.84]

26 Stay in special care nursery (days) Show forest plot

1

101

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.46 [‐0.95, 0.03]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Joel‐Cohen versus Pfannenstiel incision
Comparison 2. Muscle‐cutting/Maylard versus Pfannenstiel incision

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Postoperative febrile morbidity Show forest plot

1

97

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.26 [0.08, 19.50]

2 Blood transfusion Show forest plot

1

97

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.42 [0.02, 9.98]

3 Wound infection as defined by trial authors Show forest plot

1

97

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.26 [0.27, 5.91]

4 Long‐term complication ‐ physical test at 3 months (Janda's test) Show forest plot

1

54

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.10 [‐0.73, 0.93]

5 Postoperative hospital stay for mother (days) Show forest plot

1

97

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.40 [‐0.34, 1.14]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 2. Muscle‐cutting/Maylard versus Pfannenstiel incision