Effective Dose of Prophylactic Oxytocin Infusion During Cesarean Delivery in 90% Population of Nonlaboring Patients With Preeclampsia Receiving Magnesium Sulfate Therapy and Normotensives: An Up-Down Sequential Allocation Dose-Response Study

The propensity score is a subject's probability of treatment, conditional on observed baseline covariates. Conditional on the true propensity score, treated and untreated subjects have similar distributions of observed baseline covariates. Propensity-score matching is a popular method of using the propensity score in the medical literature. Using this approach, matched sets of treated and untreated subjects with similar values of the propensity score are formed. Inferences about treatment effect made using propensity-score matching are valid only if, in the matched sample, treated and untreated subjects have similar distributions of measured baseline covariates. In this paper we discuss the following methods for assessing whether the propensity score model has been correctly specified: comparing means and prevalences of baseline characteristics using standardized differences; ratios comparing the variance of continuous covariates between treated and untreated subjects; comparison of higher order moments and interactions; five-number summaries; and graphical methods such as quantile–quantile plots, side-by-side boxplots, and non-parametric density plots for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups. We describe methods to determine the sampling distribution of the standardized difference when the true standardized difference is equal to zero, thereby allowing one to determine the range of standardized differences that are plausible with the propensity score model having been correctly specified. We highlight the limitations of some previously used methods for assessing the adequacy of the specification of the propensity-score model. In particular, methods based on comparing the distribution of the estimated propensity score between treated and untreated subjects are uninformative. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Dose-response analysis can be carried out using multi-purpose commercial statistical software, but except for a few special cases the analysis easily becomes cumbersome as relevant, non-standard output requires manual programming. The extension package drc for the statistical environment R provides a flexible and versatile infrastructure for dose-response analyses in general. The present version of the package, reflecting extensions and modifications over the last decade, provides a user-friendly interface to specify the model assumptions about the dose-response relationship and comes with a number of extractors for summarizing fitted models and carrying out inference on derived parameters. The aim of the present paper is to provide an overview of state-of-the-art dose-response analysis, both in terms of general concepts that have evolved and matured over the years and by means of concrete examples.

The cardiovascular effects of oxytocin in animal models and women undergoing Caesarean section include tachycardia, hypotension and decrease in cardiac output. These can be sufficient to cause significant compromise in high-risk patients. We aimed to find a simple way to decrease these risks whilst retaining the benefits of oxytocin in decreasing bleeding after delivery. Method. We recruited 30 women undergoing elective Caesarean section. They were randomly allocated to receive 5 u of oxytocin either as a bolus injection (bolus group) or an infusion over 5 min (infusion group). These women had their heart rate and intra-arterial blood pressure recorded every 5 s throughout the procedure. The haemodynamic data, along with the estimated blood loss, were compared between the groups. Marked cardiovascular changes occurred in the bolus group; the heart rate increased by 17 (10.7) beats min(-1) [mean (sd)] compared with 10 (9.7) beats min(-1) in the infusion group. The mean arterial pressure decreased by 27 (7.6) mm Hg in the bolus group compared with 8 (8.7) mm Hg in the infusion group. There were no differences in the estimated blood loss between the two groups. We recommend that bolus doses should be used with caution, and further studies should ascertain if oxytocin is equally effective in reducing blood loss when given at a slower rate.