Comparison · NCT03792191-ce5bed96
Ultrasonography vs Palpation: Number of Participants With Failed Spinal Block
Calculated by ConductScience from the counts the trial posted to ClinicalTrials.gov.
2 sourcestrial-comparisons-2026-03-23-0.1.0
Cite this record
ConductScience Library. Ultrasonography vs Palpation: Number of Participants With Failed Spinal Block. Trial comparisons, record NCT03792191-ce5bed96. Release trial-comparisons-2026-03-23-0.1.0, 23 Mar 2026. https://conductscience.org/library/comparisons/NCT03792191-ce5bed96
On this page
Measures6
Calculated by ConductScience from the counts the trial posted to ClinicalTrials.gov.
| Measure | Value | 95% interval, lower | 95% interval, upper | Method | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Risk in group 1 | 0.0214 | 0.00731 | 0.0611 | wilson | |
| Risk in group 2 | 0.0286 | 0.0112 | 0.0712 | wilson | |
| Risk difference, group 1 minus group 2 | -0.00714 | -0.052 | 0.0362 | newcombe hybrid score | |
| Risk ratio, group 1 over group 2 | 0.75 | 0.171 | 3.29 | log | |
| Odds ratio, group 1 over group 2 | 0.745 | 0.164 | 3.39 | log | |
| Number needed to treat, for one fewer participant with the outcome on Ultrasonography than on Palpation | 140 | from the risk difference interval | the interval includes no difference |
Source ClinicalTrials.gov
Groups2
Neither group, or both, names a comparator, so the groups keep ClinicalTrials.gov's order.
| Group | Title | Description | With the outcome | Analysed | ClinicalTrials.gov code |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | Ultrasonography | Preprocedural lumbar spinal ultrasonography and skin marking. Spinal anesthesia was administered with injection of intrathecal bupivacaine and intrathecal fentanyl.~Lumbar Spinal Ultrasonography: Ultrasonography of the lumbar spines using an 8-2 MHz curved array transducer. Identification of the interspace with the best image. Marking the patient's skin with horizontal and vertical lines over the L3-L4 and L2-L3 interspaces.~Spinal Anesthesia: Spinal anesthesia using a 25- or 22-gauge spinal needle~Intrathecal Bupivacaine: Bupivacaine 12.5 mg (2.5 mL 0.5%) was administered in the subarachnoid space~Intrathecal Fentanyl: Fentanyl 15 μg was administered in the subarachnoid space | 3 | 140 | OG000 |
| Group 2 | Palpation | Sham ultrasound procedure. Conventional landmark palpation and skin marking. Spinal anesthesia was administered with injection of intrathecal bupivacaine and intrathecal fentanyl.~Sham Ultrasound Procedure: Moving the ultrasound probe on the patient's back with the machine in the freeze position.~Conventional Landmark Palpation: Conventional palpation of the anatomical landmarks. The line crossing the iliac crests (Tuffier line) was assumed to cross the spine at L4 spinous process or L3-L4 intervertebral space. Identification of the widest interspace. Marking the patient's skin with horizontal and vertical lines over the L3-L4 and L2-L3 interspaces.~Spinal Anesthesia: Spinal anesthesia using a 25- or 22-gauge spinal needle~Intrathecal Bupivacaine: Bupivacaine 12.5 mg (2.5 mL 0.5%) was administered in the subarachnoid space~Intrathecal Fentanyl: Fentanyl 15 μg was administered in the subarachnoid space | 4 | 140 | OG001 |
Source ClinicalTrials.gov
Outcome
- Type
- SECONDARY
- Title
- Number of Participants With Failed Spinal Block
- Description
- Number of participants with failed spinal block defined as an upper sensory level below T6 assessed by pinprick.
- Time frame
- Assessed up to 20 minutes after intrathecal injection
- Population
Source ClinicalTrials.gov
Trial
- Title
- Ultrasonography Versus Palpation for Spinal Anesthesia in Obese Parturients Undergoing Cesarean Delivery
- NCT number
- NCT03792191
- Phases
- NA
- Conditions
- Anesthesia, Spinal, Cesarean Section, Spinal Ultrasound
- Interventions
- Lumbar Spinal Ultrasonography, Sham Ultrasound Procedure, Conventional Landmark Palpation, Spinal Anesthesia, Intrathecal Bupivacaine, Intrathecal Fentanyl
- Lead sponsor
- Mansoura University
- Results first posted
- 2021-05-24
- Results on ClinicalTrials.gov
- https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03792191?tab=results
Source ClinicalTrials.gov
Source
- Release
- trial-comparisons-2026-03-23-0.1.0
- Release manifest SHA-256
- f66225897fbf258b57ea10bdacfd0347d3cdfda93f7f5685234b7e06ea36fa57
- AACT copy
- 2026-03-23
- Tables read
- outcome_counts.parquet, outcome_measurements.parquet, outcomes.parquet, reported_event_totals.parquet, reported_events.parquet, result_groups.parquet, studies.parquet, ctgov_trial.parquet
Source ClinicalTrials.gov
Sources 2
- ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTFreely available. Acknowledgement requested
- ClinicalTrials.govNo license stated
Each source's terms
- ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTClinicalTrials.gov data via Aggregate Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov (AACT), CTTI. CTTI makes its materials freely available and requests acknowledgement. https://aact.ctti-clinicaltrials.org/documentation/299
- ClinicalTrials.govnone stated
ClinicalTrials.gov's data carry an international copyright outside the United States: https://clinicaltrials.gov/about-site/terms-conditions. The measures are ConductScience's calculation from them.
For software
Read this comparison from software.
The record is JSON. No key.
GET https://conductscience.org/api/comparisons/v1/NCT03792191-ce5bed96