Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology Consensus Statement: Monitoring Recommendations for Prevention and Detection of Respiratory Depression Associated With Administration of Neuraxial Morphine for Cesarean Delivery Analgesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The majority of women undergoing cesarean delivery in the United States receive neuraxial morphine, the most effective form of postoperative analgesia for this surgery. Current American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) and American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA) recommend respiratory monitoring standards following neuraxial morphine administration in the general surgical population that may be too frequent and intensive when applied to the healthy obstetric population receiving a single dose of neuraxial morphine at the time of surgery. There is limited evidence to support or guide the optimal modality, frequency, and duration of respiratory monitoring in the postoperative cesarean delivery patient receiving a single dose of neuraxial morphine. Consistent with the mission of the Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology (SOAP) to improve outcomes in pregnancy for women and neonates, the purpose of this consensus statement is to encourage the use of this highly effective analgesic technique while promoting safe practice and patient-centered care. The document aims to reduce unnecessary interruptions from respiratory monitoring in healthy mothers while focusing vigilance on monitoring in those women at highest risk for respiratory depression following neuraxial morphine administration. This consensus statement promotes the use of low-dose neuraxial morphine and multimodal analgesia after cesarean delivery, gives perspective on the safety of this analgesic technique in healthy women, and promotes patient risk stratification and perioperative risk assessment to determine and adjust the intensity, frequency, and duration of respiratory monitoring.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".