Pain relief in labor by transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. Testing of a modified stimulation technique and evaluation of the neurological and biochemical condition of the newborn infant. A study of co-treatment of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) with misoprostol for cervical priming before suction termination of first trimester pregnancy. Effects of epidural fentanyl on labor pain during the early period of the first stage of induced labor in nulliparous women. Randomized trial of epidural versus intravenous analgesia during labor. A randomized controlled trial of nonpharmacologic approaches for relief of low back pain during labor. Epidural morphine vs hydromorphone in post-caesarean section patients. An early labor assessment program: a randomized, controlled trial. A multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing patient-controlled epidural with intravenous analgesia for pain relief in labor. Nulliparous active labor, epidural analgesia, and cesarean delivery for dystocia. A comparison of meptazinol and pethidine for pain relief during the first stage of labour. Acupuncture in the management of pain in labor. Comparison between massage and music therapies to relieve the severity of labor pain. Music reduces sensation and distress of labor pain.
In this prospective randomized study of pain relief in labor, the effect of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TNS) performed over both the low-back and suprapubic region was evaluated and compared with a control group not receiving TNS. Both high frequency and pulse train TNS were used. The study included 24 induced labors. In the TNS group, conventional methods were added when needed, while in the control group only conventional methods were used. Assessment of low-back and suprapubic pain was performed by the parturient each hour during the first stage. In the TNS group most of the parturients reported minimal or moderate low-back pain throughout labor, while parturients in the control group reported an increased intensity of low-back pain as labor progressed. The effect of suprapubic pain was insignificant in both groups. Neither TNS nor nitrous oxide-oxygen mixture and pethidine could reduce this pain component. Course of labor, uterine activity and fetal heart patterns were similar in the two groups. The neonates were evaluated with Apgar score, assays of blood samples from the umbilical vein including blood lactate, plasma hypoxanthine and blood gas, and neurobehavioral assessment on two occasions. All newborn infants were in good condition and no significant differences between the two groups could be demonstrated. This double-blind randomized control study was conducted to evaluate whether a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) could act as an effective pain control method during first trimester suction abortion, and whether co-treatment of NSAID with misoprostol will decrease the efficacy of the cervical ripening effect of misoprostol. Subjects were randomized to receive misoprostol alone or misoprostol together with diclofenac sodium. Both groups of subjects suffered from similar incidence of preoperative side effects. Co-treatment of NSAID with misoprostol did not attenuate the cervical ripening efficacy of misoprostol. There was no significant pain reduction in the group treated with NSAID, except that a marginal benefit was found in the subgroup of multiparous women. About two thirds of the subjects in both treatment groups found that this was a satisfactory pain relief method during the procedure. It is generally accepted that epidural injection with local anesthetics and narcotics administered when the cervix has dilated to a diameter exceeding 4 cm can adequately control labor pain. However, many nulliparous women still suffer from labor pain for a few hours prior to the administration of epidural analgesia. This study examined the effectiveness of relief of labor pain obtained by injection of narcotics epidurally once the labor pain begins and the subject requests analgesia.
                Subjects scheduled for induced labour were divided into three groups: Group A (n = 60) received 5 x 10(-4)% fentanyl (10-20 mL) administered epidurally to relieve early first-stage labor pain. Group B (n = 60) received no analgesic in the early first stage of labor. For groups A and B, when cervical dilatation exceeded 4 cm, 10 to 15 mL of 5 x 10(-2)% bupivacaine and 2 x 10(-4)% fentanyl were injected epidurally and a continuous low dosage was maintained until full dilatation of the cervix resulted. Group C (n = 198) received no analgesic during the entire labor course.
                There were no significant differences in the duration of the early period of the first stage of labor, the duration of the late period of the first stage, the duration of the second stage, the Apgar score, or the arterial blood gas of neonates among the three groups. However, group C had a significantly higher cesarean section rate (28.8%) than group A (16.7%) or group B (15%). Pain scores assessed with the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) throughout the entire labor course, were lower in group A than in group B; particularly during the early period of the first stage. The VAS scores in both groups A and B were significantly lower than those in group C during the late period of the first stage of labor.
                The results indicate that once labor pain begins and the subject requests analgesia, epidural injection with fentanyl alone can relieve labor pain during the early period of the first stage. The analgesia does not cause adverse effects to the mothers or neonates. In addition, the labor course and the method of delivery are not affected. To compare the effects of epidural analgesia with intravenous (IV) analgesia on the outcome of labor.
                Thirteen hundred thirty women with uncomplicated term pregnancies and in spontaneous labor were randomized to be offered epidural bupivacaine-fentanyl or IV meperidine analgesia during labor.
                Comparison of the allocation groups by intent to treat revealed a significant association between epidural allocation and operative delivery for dystocia. However, only 65% of each randomization group accepted the allocated treatment. Four hundred thirty-seven women accepted and received meperidine as allocated, and they were compared with 432 women accepting epidural allocation. Significant associations resulted between epidural administration and prolongation of labor, increased rate of oxytocin administration, chorioamnionitis, low forceps, and cesarean delivery. Because of the high rate of noncompliance with treatment allocation, a multifactorial regression analysis was performed on the entire cohort, and a twofold relative risk of cesarean delivery persisted in association with epidural treatment. The impact of epidural treatment on cesarean delivery was significant for both nulliparous and parous women (risk ratios 2.55 and 3.81, respectively). Epidural analgesia provided significantly better pain relief in labor than did parenteral meperidine.
                Although labor epidural analgesia is superior to meperidine for pain relief, labor is prolonged, uterine infection is increased, and the number of operative deliveries are increased. A two- to fourfold increased risk of cesarean delivery is associated with epidural treatment in both nulliparous and parous women. Low back pain is common during labor. Our randomized controlled trial compared the effectiveness of 3 nonpharmacologic approaches for relief of back pain.
                A total of 34 women suffering from low back pain during labor were randomly assigned to receive 1 of 3 treatments: (1) intracutaneous sterile water injections (ISW); (2) transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS); and (3) standard care, including back massage, whirlpool bath, and liberal mobilization. Women self-evaluated both intensity and affective dimensions of pain using visual analog scales. Their evaluations of control and satisfaction were assessed using adapted versions of the Labour Agentry Scale and the Labor and Delivery Satisfaction Index.
                Women in the ISW group rated the intensity and unpleasantness of pain during the experimental period significantly lower than women in the standard care group or the TENS group, (P = .001 and P = .003, respectively). Similar results were observed for intensity (P = .01) and unpleasantness (P = .03) of pain assessed just before delivery or request for an epidural. Mean pain intensity at 15 and 60 minutes after randomization was significantly reduced in the ISW group compared with the 2 other groups. There was no significant difference in the 3 groups in the level of control and satisfaction with labor and delivery, but less women in the ISW group indicated that they would like to receive the same treatment for back pain during another delivery.
                Intracutaneous sterile water injections are more effective than standard care (back massage, bath, and mobilization) or transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for relieving low back pain during labor. The purpose of this randomized controlled double blind study was to compare the efficacy of pain relief and the side effects of epidural hydromorphone and morphine in post-Caesarean patients.
                In all patients, epidural anaesthesia was induced using carbonated lidocaine 2% with 1:200,000 epinephrine and 50 micrograms fentanyl, given in incremental doses. Patients in Group 1 (n = 24) received 0.6 mg hydromorphone and patients in Group 2 (n = 22) received 3 mg morphine after delivery of the infant. Pain, pruritus and nausea were measured using a visual analog scale (at times: baseline, on admission to the recovery room, 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 hr postoperatively), by the number of requests for additional medications and by an overall satisfaction score.
                There was no difference between the groups in pain relief of in the incidence and severity of side effects. Pruritus was more pronounced within the first six hours in Group 1 and at 18 hr in Group 2.
                Hydromorphone provides no clinical benefit over epidural morphine for post operative analgesia following Caesarean section. Approximately 31 percent of cesarean deliveries in the United States and Canada are performed for dystocia. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of early labor assessment to reduce cesarean birth rates for low-risk nulliparous women.
                Two hundred and nine low-risk nulliparous women were randomly allocated to either the early labor assessment group or the direct admission to hospital group. Women in the early labor assessment group were evaluated and, if found to be in false or latent labor, were encouraged to go home or walk before admission to the labor unit. Those in the direct admission group were admitted to the labor unit without an assessment. Data were collected and analyzed about method of delivery, duration of labor, intrapartum interventions, and neonatal well-being. Women completed an evaluation of their experience in the early postpartum period.
                Significant decreases occurred in duration of labor, use of epidural analgesia for pain, and use of oxytocin to augment labor in the early labor assessment group. These women evaluated their labor and birth experience more positively than women in the direct admission group. No significant differences were found in the frequency of cesarean section or instrumental vaginal delivery for the two groups.
                Early labor assessment has the potential to reduce the number of women receiving oxytocin for augmentation, the rate of epidural analgesia for pain relief, and the duration of the active and second stages of labor, and to improve women's evaluations of their labor and birth experiences. In this multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, we sought to determine whether patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) for labor affected the incidence of cesarean delivery when compared with patient-controlled IV opioid analgesia (PCIA). Healthy, term nulliparous patients in 4 Canadian institutions were randomly assigned to receive PCIA with fentanyl (n = 118) or PCEA with 0.08% bupivacaine and fentanyl 1.6 microg/mL (n = 124). There was no difference in the incidence of cesarean delivery-10.2% (12 of 118) versus 9.7% (12 of 124)-or instrumental vaginal delivery-21.2% (25 of 118) versus 29% (36 of 124)-between groups. The duration of the second stage of labor was increased in the PCEA group by a median of 23 min (P = 0.02). Fifty-one patients (43%) in the PCIA group received epidural analgesia: 39 (33%) because of inadequate pain relief and 12 (10%) to facilitate operative delivery. Patients in the PCIA group required more antiemetic therapy (17% versus 6.4%; P = 0.01) and had more sedation (39% versus 5%; P < 0.001). Maternal mean pain and satisfaction with analgesia scores were better in the PCEA group (P < 0.001 and P = 0.02, respectively). More neonates in the PCIA group required active resuscitation (52% versus 31%; P = 0.001) and naloxone (17% versus 3%; P < 0.001). These observations support the hypothesis that PCEA does not result in an increased incidence of obstetrical intervention compared with PCIA. PCEA provides superior analgesia and less maternal and neonatal sedation compared with PCIA. Our purpose was to examine the effect of epidural analgesia on dystocia-related cesarean delivery in actively laboring nulliparous women.
                Active labor was confirmed in nulliparous women by uterine contractions, cervical dilatation of 4 cm, effacement of 80%, and fetopelvic engagement. Patients were randomized to one of two groups: epidural analgesia or narcotics. A strict protocol for labor management was in place. Patients recorded the level of pain at randomization and at hourly intervals on a visual analog scale. Elective outlet operative vaginal delivery was permitted.
                One hundred women were randomized. No difference in the rate of cesarean delivery for dystocia was noted between the groups (epidural 8%, narcotic 6%; p = 0.71). No significant differences were noted in the lengths of the first (p = 0.54) or second (p = 0.55) stages of labor or in any other time variable. Women with epidural analgesia underwent operative vaginal delivery more frequently (p = 0.004). Pain scores were equivalent at randomization, but large differences existed at each hour thereafter. The number of patients randomized did not achieve prestudy estimates. A planned interim analysis of the results demonstrated that we were unlikely to find a statistically significant difference in cesarean delivery rates in a trial of reasonable duration.
                With strict criteria for the diagnosis of labor and with use of a rigid protocol for labor management, there was no increase in dystocia-related cesarean delivery with epidural analgesia. Meptazinol and pethidine were compared in a double-blind randomized trial with regard to analgesia during the first stage of labour. It was concluded that neither drug is effective for sustained pain relief, and that there is no advantage of one over the other. However, neither drug affected maternal condition as reflected by respiratory rate, pulse rate and blood pressure, nor was any detrimental effect noted on the condition of the newborn infant. The critical reassessment of traditional drugs for analgesia in labour is suggested. To assess if acupuncture could be a reasonable option for pain relief in labor and to look at possible effects of acupuncture on the progress of labor.
                In a controlled, single blind study, 210 healthy parturients in spontaneous, active labor at term were randomly assigned to receive either real acupuncture or false acupuncture. Visual analog scale assessments were used to evaluate subjective effect on pain. The objective parameter of outcome was the need for analgesic medication in each group.
                There were significantly lower mean pain scores and significantly less need for pharmacological analgesia in the study group compared with the control group. The women given real acupuncture spent less time in active labor and needed less augmentation than the control group.
                The results indicate that acupuncture reduces the experience of pain in labor. A secondary outcome of acupuncture was a shorter delivery time, which mainly, if not exclusively, can be explained by the reduced need for epidural analgesia. Acupuncture may be useful for parturients who wish a nonpharmacological analgesia without side-effects. For others it could be the analgesic method of choice, with pharmacological analgesics as supplements. During labor, women experience a high level of intense, stressful and steady pain that may negatively affect both mothers and neonates. Painkillers have previously been used for childbearing women, but nowadays, owing to some well-known limitations and serious side effects, nonpharmacologic methods such as massage and music therapies are being broadly recommended. The present clinical trial was conducted to compare the effects of massage and music therapies on the severity of labor pain in the Ilam province of western Iran.
                Overall, 101 primigravidae who were hospitalized for vaginal delivery were recruited and randomly stratified into two groups of either massage (n = 51) or music (n = 50) therapies. Pain was measured using the visual analog scale and the two groups were compared in terms of pain severity before and after the interventions.
                Mothers in the massage therapy group had a lower level of pain compared with those in the music therapy group (p = 0.009). A significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of pain severity after intervention (p = 0.01). Agonizing, or most severe, labor pain was significantly relieved after massage therapy (p = 0.001).
                Massage therapy was an effective method for reducing and relieving labor pain compared with music therapy and can be clinically recommended as an alternative, safe and affordable method of pain relief where using either pharmacological or nonpharmacological methods are optional. Labor pain is often severe, and analgesic medication may not be indicated. In this randomized controlled trial we examined the effects of music on sensation and distress of pain in Thai primiparous women during the active phase of labor. The gate control theory of pain was the theoretical framework for this study. Randomization with a computerized minimization program was used to assign women to a music group (n = 55) or a control group (n = 55). Women in the intervention group listened to soft music without lyrics for 3 hours starting early in the active phase of labor. Dual visual analog scales were used to measure sensation and distress of pain before starting the study and at three hourly posttests. While controlling for pretest scores, one-way repeated measures analysis of covariance indicated that those in the music group had significantly less sensation and distress of pain than did the control group (F (1, 107) = 18.69, p <.001, effect size =.15, and F (1, 107) = 14.87, p <.001, effect size =.12), respectively. Sensation and distress significantly increased across the 3 hours in both groups (p <.001), except for distress in the music group during the first hour. Distress was significantly lower than sensation in both groups (p <.05). In this controlled study, music--a mild to moderate strength intervention--consistently provided significant relief of severe pain across 3 hours of labor and delayed the increase of affective pain for 1 hour. Nurses can provide soft music to laboring women for greater pain relief during the active phase when contractions are strong and women suffer.
Overall, the findings of this review demonstrated insufficient evidence to support a role for non-opioid drugs on their own to manage pain during labour.