A multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing patient-controlled epidural with intravenous analgesia for pain relief in labor. A randomized trial of intrapartum analgesia in women with severe preeclampsia. Epidural block or parenteral pethidine as analgesic in labour; a randomized study concerning progress in labour and instrumental deliveries. Randomized trial of epidural versus intravenous analgesia during labor. A randomized trial of labor analgesia in women with pregnancy-induced hypertension. Intramuscular opioids for maternal pain relief in labour: a randomised controlled trial comparing pethidine with diamorphine. Labor analgesia: a comparative study between combined spinal-epidural anesthesia versus continuous epidural anesthesia. Labor analgesia in preeclampsia: remifentanil patient controlled intravenous analgesia versus epidural analgesia. The influence of epidural analgesia on cesarean delivery rates: a randomized, prospective clinical trial. Cesarean delivery: a randomized trial of epidural versus patient-controlled meperidine analgesia during labor. A randomized study of combined spinal-epidural analgesia versus intravenous meperidine during labor: impact on cesarean delivery rate. Prospective, randomized comparison of epidural and combined spinal epidural analgesia during labor. [Evaluation of the peripartum effects of 2 analgesics: meperidine and tramadol, used in labor]. Pain relief in labour using transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS). A TENS/TENS placebo controlled study in two parity groups. The effect of intrapartum epidural analgesia on nulliparous labor: a randomized, controlled, prospective trial. Intravenous fentanyl PCA during labour. Clinical study on labor pain relief using the combined spinal-epidural analgesia and inhaling nitrous oxide. Postoperative analgesia for Caesarean section using epidural methadone. Intravenous butorphanol, meperidine, and their combination relieve pain and distress in women in labor. Immersion in water in the first stage of labor: a randomized controlled trial. Effect of maternal ambulation on labour with low-dose combined spinal-epidural analgesia. Cesarean delivery: a randomized trial of epidural analgesia versus intravenous meperidine analgesia during labor in nulliparous women. Patient-controlled analgesia for post-cesarean section pain. Effects of epidural fentanyl on labor pain during the early period of the first stage of induced labor in nulliparous women. Epidural patient-controlled analgesia: an alternative to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia for pain relief after cesarean delivery. Regional analgesia in early active labour: combined spinal epidural vs. epidural. Comparison of combined spinal-epidural and low dose epidural for labour analgesia. Electro-acupuncture as a peroperative analgesic method and its effects on implantation rate and neuropeptide Y concentrations in follicular fluid. Submucous paracervical blockade compared with intramuscular meperidine as analgesia during labor: a double-blind study. Effects of epidural lidocaine analgesia on labor and delivery: a randomized, prospective, controlled trial. Reversal of narcotic depression in the neonate by nalozone. Nulliparous active labor, epidural analgesia, and cesarean delivery for dystocia. A comparison of intrathecal, epidural, and intravenous sufentanil for labor analgesia. Anesthetic quality during cesarean section following subarachnoid or epidural administration of bupivacaine with or without fentanyl. Epidural morphine vs hydromorphone in post-caesarean section patients. Iliohypogastric-ilioinguinal peripheral nerve block for post-Cesarean delivery analgesia decreases morphine use but not opioid-related side effects. Randomized controlled comparison of epidural bupivacaine versus pethidine for analgesia in labour. Acupuncture in the management of pain in labor. A randomised controlled trial of epidural compared with non-epidural analgesia in labour. Continuous epidural infusion for analgesia after major abdominal operations: a randomized, prospective, double-blind study. The impact of intrapartum analgesia on labour and delivery outcomes in nulliparous women. Double-blind comparison of maternal analgesia and neonatal neurobehaviour following intravenous butorphanol and meperidine. Epidural narcotic and patient-controlled analgesia for post-cesarean section pain relief. [Transcutaneous cerebral electric stimulation by Limoge current during labor].
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. To estimate whether the cesarean delivery rate differs between women with severe preeclampsia who receive intrapartum epidural analgesia versus patient-controlled intravenous opioid analgesia.
                Women with severe preeclampsia at at least 24 weeks' gestation were randomly assigned to receive either intrapartum epidural (n = 56) versus patient-controlled intravenous opioid analgesia (n = 60), and each was administered by a standardized protocol. The sample size was selected to have 80% power to detect at least a 50% difference in the predicted intergroup cesarean delivery rates. Data were analyzed by intent to treat.
                Selected maternal characteristics and neonatal outcomes were similar in the two groups. The cesarean delivery rates in the epidural group (18%) and the patient-controlled analgesia group (12%) were similar (P =.35). Women who received epidural analgesia were more likely to require ephedrine for the treatment of hypotension (9% versus 0%, P =.02), but their infants were less likely to require naloxone at delivery (9% versus 54%, P <.001). Epidural analgesia provided significantly better pain relief as determined by a visual analogue intrapartum pain score (P <.001) and a postpartum pain management survey (P =.002).
                Compared with patient-controlled intravenous opioid analgesia, intrapartum epidural analgesia did not significantly increase the cesarean delivery rate in women with severe preeclampsia at our level III center, and it provided superior pain relief. A prospective randomized study was performed to evaluate the influence of epidural analgesia compared to parenteral pethidine in parturients with pain in the first stage of labour on the progress of labour and the frequency of instrumental deliveries. There was no significant difference in the two groups in the duration of either the first or second stage of labour. The overall instrumental delivery rate was 25%, with no difference between the groups. The analgesic efficacy of the epidural blockade was significantly better than that of parenteral pethidine. We conclude that epidural bupivacaine with our technique and obstetric practice did neither prolong labour nor increase the frequency of instrumental delivery. 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. The purpose of this study was to compare the peripartum and perinatal effects of epidural with intravenous labor analgesia in women with pregnancy-induced hypertension.
                Women with pregnancy-induced hypertension who had consented to participate were randomized to receive either epidural or intravenous analgesia for labor pain. Both methods were given according to standardized protocols. All women received magnesium sulfate seizure prophylaxis. Obstetric and neonatal outcomes were compared according to intent-to-treat allocation.
                Seven hundred thirty-eight women were randomized: 372 women were given epidural analgesia, and 366 women were given intravenous analgesia. Maternal characteristics were similar, including the severity of hypertension. Epidural analgesia was associated with a significantly prolonged second-stage labor, an increase in forceps deliveries, and an increase in chorioamnionitis. Cesarean delivery rates and neonatal outcomes were similar. Pain relief was superior with the epidural method. Hypotension required treatment in 11% of women in the epidural group.
                Epidural labor analgesia provides superior pain relief but no additional therapeutic benefit to women with pregnancy-induced hypertension. To compare the pain relief and side effects of intramuscular pethidine with intramuscular diamorphine in labour.
                Double-blind randomised controlled trial.
                The labour ward in a UK teaching hospital.
                Sixty-nine nulliparous women and 64 multiparous women in labour who requested narcotic analgesia and remained undelivered one hour after trial entry.
                Nulliparous women were randomised to receive either 150 mg intramuscular pethidine or 7.5 mg intramuscular diamorphine. Multiparous women were randomised to receive either 100 mg intramuscular pethidine or 5 mg intramuscular diamorphine. All participants received the anti-emetic prochloroperazine at the same time as the trial drugs.
                Maternal analgesia assessed by a visual analogue score and verbal scales of pain intensity and pain relief, maternal sedation and vomiting, neonatal outcome assessed by Apgar scores and the need for resuscitation.
                More women allocated to receiving pethidine than to diamorphine reported slight or no pain relief at 60 minutes after administration of these drugs (P = 0.03). This trend was repeated in most of the other measures for maternal analgesia. There was no difference in maternal sedation, but the incidence of vomiting within 60 minutes was lower for women who received diamorphine (P = 0.02). Pethidine was associated with lower Apgar scores at 1 minute (P < 0.05).
                Intramuscular diamorphine in labour appears to have some benefits, compared with intramuscular pethidine, but the trial was small and further research, particularly into alternative opioids and long term effects on the infants is still needed. Pain relief during labor is a permanent concern, aiming at the maternal well being, decreasing the stress secondary to pain, and reducing its consequences on the fetus. Several analgesia techniques can be used during labor. The aim of this study was to compare continuous and combined epidural analgesia, both of them using 0.25% bupivacaine with 50% enantiomeric excess and fentanyl.
                Forty pregnant women, in labor, with cervical dilation between 4 and 5 cm, were randomly divided in two groups. Group I received continuous epidural anesthesia. Group II received combined anesthesia. The following parameters were evaluated: anthropometric measurements, gestational age, cervical dilation, length of time between the blockade and absence of pain according to the visual analogic scale, ability to walk, length of time between analgesia and complete cervical dilation, duration of the expulsive phase, maternal hemodynamic parameters, and vitality of the newborn. Possible complications, such as respiratory depression, maternal hypotension, pruritus, nausea, and vomiting were also evaluated. The Student t test was used to compare the means and the Chi-square test was used to compare the number of pregnancies and type of labor.
                There were no statistically significant differences between both groups regarding the length of time between the beginning of analgesia and complete cervical dilation, as well as regarding the duration of the expulsive phase, incidence of cesarean section related to the analgesia, maternal hemodynamic parameters, and vitality of the newborn.
                Both techniques are effective and safe for labor analgesia, although the combined technique provided fast and immediate pain relief. Clinical studies with a larger number of patients are necessary to evaluate the differences in the incidence of cesarean sections. Epidural analgesia is considered to be the preferred method of labor analgesia in preeclamptic patients. Systemic opioids are another good effective, easy to administer alternative but may cause maternal and fetal respiratory depression. Remifentanil's rapid onset and offset of effects, should make it an ideal drug for the intermittent painful contraction during labor. Method. 30 preeclamptic patients were randomly assigned to one of two equal groups; Epidural Group: received epidural analgesia according to a standardized protocol using bupivacaine plus fentanyl. REMIFENTANIL GROUP: PCA was set up to deliver remlfentanil 0.5 microg/kg as a loading bolus infused over 20 seconds, lockout time of 5 minutes, PCA bolus of 0.25 microg/kg, continuous background infusion of 0.05 microg/kg/min, and maximum dose is 3 mg in 4 hours. Women were advised to start the PCA bolus when they feel the signs of a coming uterine contraction.
                All women demonstrated a significant decrease in VAS score in the first hour after administration of analgesia (P < 0.05). Analgesic quality as regard Visual Analog Pain Scores, sedation score, and post-delivery patient satisfaction in both groups, are comparable (P > 0.05). PCA remifentanil infusion until time of delivery produce no observable maternal, fetal or neonatal side effects (P < 0.05).
                PCA intravenous remifentanil is an effective option for pain relief with minimal maternal and neonatal side effects in labor for preeclamptic patients with contraindications to epidural analgesia or requesting opioid analgesia. The effects of epidural analgesia on the progress of labor are controversial. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of epidural analgesia on cesarean delivery rates in a population of patients randomly assigned to receive either epidural analgesia or intravenous opioids for intrapartum pain relief.
                From January 1995 to May 1996, 318 spontaneously laboring, term, nulliparous patients were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous opioids or epidural analgesia for pain relief. Labor was managed according to the principles of active management of labor. Cesarean delivery was performed for obstetric indications. Data analysis was conducted on an intent-to-treat basis. A subanalysis was subsequently performed on patients who were compliant with the allocated form of treatment.
                One hundred sixty-two patients were randomly assigned to receive intravenous meperidine and 156 were randomly assigned to receive epidural analgesia. Maternal age, gravidity, race, gestational age, and cervical dilatation at admission and at first analgesic dose did not differ between the groups. Intent-to-treat data analysis revealed no significant difference in the cesarean delivery rate between the 2 groups, being 13.6% in the opioid group and 9.6% in the epidural group (relative risk 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.38-1.31, P >.05). Cesarean delivery rates for the indication of dystocia also did not differ, being 10.5% in the opioid group and 5.8% in the epidural group (relative risk 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.26-1.21, P >.05). Subanalysis of the data from patients who were compliant with the allocated form of treatment revealed that patients in the epidural group (n = 147) were 3 times more likely to have an active phase duration >/=8 hours and were 10 times more likely to require >/=2 hours in the second stage of labor than were those in the opioid group (n = 78). There were no significant differences in cesarean delivery rates in this subanalysis, being 7.7% in the opioid group and 8.8% in the epidural group (relative risk 1.15, 95% confidence interval 0.45-2.91, P >. 05). The cesarean delivery rates for dystocia were also similar in the subanalysis, being 3.8% in the opioid group and 5.5% in the epidural group (relative risk 1.42, 95% confidence interval 0.39-5. 22, P >.05).
                Epidural analgesia provides safe and effective intrapartum pain control and may be administered without undesirable effects on labor outcome. Reports indicate that the administration of epidural analgesia for pain relief during labor interferes with labor and increases cesarean deliveries. However, only a few controlled trials have assessed the effect of epidural analgesia on the incidence of cesarean delivery. The authors' primary purpose in this randomized study was to evaluate the effects of epidural analgesia on the rate of cesarean deliveries by providing a suitable alternative: patient-controlled intravenous analgesia.
                Seven hundred fifteen women of mixed parity in spontaneous labor at full term were randomly assigned to receive either epidural analgesia or patient-controlled intravenous meperidine analgesia. Epidural analgesia was maintained with a continuous epidural infusion of 0.125% bupivacaine with 2 microg/ml fentanyl. Patient-controlled analgesia was maintained with 10-15 mg meperidine given every 10 min as needed using a patient-controlled pump. Procedures recorded in a manual that prescribed the intrapartum management were followed for each woman randomized in the study.
                A total of 358 women were randomized to receive epidural analgesia, and 243 (68%) of these women complied with the epidural analgesia protocol. Similarly, 357 women were randomized to receive patient-controlled intravenous meperidine analgesia, and 259 (73%) of these women complied with the patient-controlled intravenous analgesia protocol. Only five women who were randomized and received patient-controlled intravenous meperidine analgesia according to the protocol crossed over to epidural analgesia due to inadequate pain relief. There was no difference in the rate of cesarean deliveries between the two analgesia groups using intention-to-treat analysis based on the original randomization (epidural analgesia, 4% [95% CI: 1.9-6.2%] compared with patient-controlled intravenous analgesia, 5% [95% CI: 2.6-7.2%]). Similar results were observed for the analysis of the protocol-compliant groups (epidural analgesia, 5% [95% CI: 2.6-8.5%] compared with patient-controlled intravenous analgesia, 6% [95% CI: 3-8.9%]). Women who received epidural analgesia reported lower pain scores during labor and delivery compared with women who received patient-controlled intravenous analgesia.
                Epidural analgesia was not associated with increased numbers of cesarean delivery when compared with a suitable alternative method of analgesia. Combined spinal-epidural (CSE) analgesia produces rapid-onset pain relief and allows ambulation in early labor. Epidural local anesthetics may contribute to an increase in operative deliveries by decreasing perineal sensation and causing motor weakness. Operative delivery rates might be reduced with CSE, by avoiding or delaying administration of local anesthetics. This study compares the operative delivery rates associated with a CSE technique and those associated with intravenous meperidine for labor analgesia.
                Healthy parturients at full term were assigned randomly to receive CSE or intravenous meperidine analgesia. The CSE group received 10 microg intrathecal sufentanil, followed by epidural bupivacaine and fentanyl at their next request for analgesia. Parturients receiving intravenous meperidine had 50 mg on demand (maximum, 200 mg in 4 h). Labor and delivery outcomes in both groups were recorded and compared.
                An intent-to-treat analysis of 1,223 women indicated that CSE does not increase the rate of cesarean delivery for dystocia in nulliparous and parous women (CSE, 3.5% vs. intravenous meperidine, 4; P=not significant) or in nulliparous women alone (CSE, 7% vs. intravenous meperidine, 8%; P=not significant). Profound fetal bradycardia that necessitated emergency cesarean delivery within 1 h of the time the mother received sufentanil occurred in 8 of 400 parturients (compared with 0 of 352 who received meperidine; P < 0.01). However, the method of fetal monitoring differed between the two groups. Despite this, neonatal outcomes were similar overall.
                Combined spinal-epidural analgesia during labor does not increase the cesarean delivery rate for dystocia in healthy parturient patients at full term, regardless of parity. However, an unexpected increase in the number of cesarean deliveries for profound fetal bradycardia after intrathecal sufentanil was observed. Further investigation is warranted. The analgesic efficacy and incidence of maternal, fetal and neonatal side-effects of combined spinal epidural (CSE) and epidural (EPI) analgesia, using a mixture of bupivacaine 0.125%, epinephrine (1.25 micrograms.ml-1) and sufentanil (0.75 microgram.ml-1) for the relief of labor pain, were randomly and prospectively compared in 110 parturients. A 29 gauge Whitacre tip spinal needle was used to perforate the dura in CSE patients. Compared to EPI, CSE resulted in rapid (326 +/- 22 vs 766 +/- 79 sec, p < 0.05), excellent analgesia, using less bupivacaine (23.5 +/- 2.3 vs 33.9 +/- 2.9 mg, p < 0.05) and sufentanil (12.5 +/- 1.0 vs 16.5 +/- .7 micrograms, p < 0.05). A tendency to improved patient satisfaction in the CSE group was observed. The incidence of maternal or neonatal side effects was similar in both groups. No PDPH was observed. We conclude that CSE analgesia results in excellent pain relief during labor with immediate gratification as compared to epidural analgesia. The need for analgesia to overcome pain in labour is highly requested by women today. Various ways either non pharmachologic e.g. Emotional sustain, psycho-prophylactic preparation, yoga and hypnosis or pharmachologic such as epidural blockade or parenteral are used. Therefore in our study we evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of the two opioids usually used today in parenteral analgesia to reduce pain during labour: Tramadol and Meperidine. We studied two groups of patients each made up of 20 women in labour, all at term and with a physiologic course of pregnancy. 75 mg i.m. of Meperidine chloryhydrate were somministered in the first group while in the second group 100 mg i.m. of tramadol chloryhydrate were somministered. Various maternal, fetal and neonatal parameters were then monitored demonstrating--A moderate maternal analgesic effect in both drugs (evaluated through the analogic grading of pain). In the group to whom Meperidine was given, sedative effects on the mother were observed associated with respiratory depression in the newborn (the latter evaluated through the Apgar index at 1st and 5th minute of life and pH of the blood obtained at the umbilical cord. The data obtained permitted us to conclude that Tramadol in accordance to the obtained in literature gives an analogous analgesic effect, with better tolerability for the absence of collateral effects on the mother, fetus and newborn. The analgesic effects of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in labour and effects on outcome were investigated in a double-blind TENS/TENS placebo controlled trial in 100 primigravidae and 50 women in their third labour. There were no differences between the TENS and the TENS placebo users in terms of pain concept or relief, and only 12 and 13% of primigravidae and 48 and 39% of the para 2 women completed labour without requiring other analgesia in their respective groups. The primigravidae who used either TENS or TENS placebo alone had shorter labours than those who required further analgesia. Although the outcome of labour for mother and infant were similar in the two groups, there was a higher operative delivery rate in women who also had epidural analgesia. There were highly significant differences between the TENS and the TENS placebo users in terms of favourable and unfavourable comments by the mothers and the midwives at 1 and 24 h after delivery. The evident consumer satisfaction for TENS suggests TENS has a part to play in analgesia in labour but the equivocal findings in terms of factors associated with pain relief points to the need for apparatus more specifically designed to cope with the special characteristics of the pain of labour. Our purpose was to determine the effect of epidural analgesia on nulliparous labor and delivery.
                Normal term nulliparous women in early spontaneous labor were randomized to receive either narcotic or epidural analgesia.
                When compared with the group receiving narcotic analgesia (n = 45), the group receiving epidural analgesia (n = 48) had a significant prolongation in the first and second stages of labor, an increased requirement for oxytocin augmentation, and a significant slowing in the rate of cervical dilatation. Epidural analgesia was associated with a significant increase in malposition (4.4% vs 18.8%, p < 0.05). Cesarean delivery occurred more frequently in the epidural group (2.2% vs 25%, p < 0.05), primarily related to an increase in cesarean section for dystocia (2.2% vs 16.7%, p < 0.05).
                In a randomized, controlled, prospective trial epidural analgesia resulted in a significant prolongation in the first and second stages of labor and a significant increase in the frequency of cesarean delivery, primarily related to dystocia. To evaluate the usefulness of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) fentanyl for labour analgesia, its effectiveness for maternal pain and safety for the fetus and newborn.
                Twenty primigravidas were randomised to receive intravenous PCA fentanyl or epidural analgesia for labour pain. Maternal pain, heart rate and arterial oxyhaemoglobin saturation (SpO2) were monitored. Fetal and neonatal monitoring included cardiotocogram (CTG), APGAR, neurological scoring and static-charge-sensitive bed (SCSB) recording for 12 hr postnatally with ECG and SpO2. Fentanyl concentrations and pH of umbilical artery and vein were analysed.
                Initially, epidural analgesia was more effective (P = 0.01), and three patients in the fentanyl group were given epidural due to unsatisfactory pain relief. Overall satisfaction for analgesia did not differ between the groups. Maternal side-effects were more frequent in the fentanyl group (dizziness and tiredness most often, P = 0.0001). Severe side-effects were not reported. In CTG there were no differences between groups. All the newborns were healthy, APGAR and pH were normal. Naloxone was not used. Neurological scoring was similar in both groups. In 12 hr monitoring heart rate, breathing frequency and movement time were similar in both groups, but SpO2 was lower in the fentanyl group (P < 0.001). Umbilical cord fentanyl concentrations were low or beyond the detection limit.
                Intravenous fentanyl can be used for labour analgesia with the doses reported here as an alternative to epidural analgesia. However, the fetus and neonate must be appropriately monitored. Naloxone and oxygen should be available if neonatal distress occurs. To study the pain relief effectiveness of the combined spinal-epidural analgesia (CSEA) and the inhalation of nitrous oxide, and the influences on the mothers and infants.
                The 300 cases of pregnant women were randomly divided into 3 groups: CSEA group, nitrous oxide group and control group. The nitrous oxide group was that pregnant women inhaled nitrous oxide premixed with oxygen (50%:50%), the pregnant women of the CSEA group were injected fentanyl and bupivacaine in the subarachnoid and epidural space, analgesic was not used in the control group. The degree of labor pain, duration of the labor, way of delivery, bleeding volume, rate of anoxia of newborn, blood gas analysis to maternal radius artery and fetal umbilical blood among 3 groups were observed.
                The effect for analgesia labor of the CSEA group was much better than that of the nitrous oxide group (P < 0.01). In the first stage of labor and total stage of labor, the CSEA group was shorter than the others (P < 0.05), but there was no difference between the nitrous oxide group and the control group (P > 0.05). In the second stage of labor, the 3 groups were alike to each other. The bleeding volume of caesarean section (373 +/- 77) ml in the nitrous oxide group was much more than the other 2 groups, there was no difference between the CSEA group (259 +/- 78) ml and the control group (239 +/- 89) ml. The rate of obstetric forceps of CSEA group was higher than the control group (P < 0.01), and the rate of caesarean section of the nitrous oxide group was much higher than the CSEA group. The blood gas analysis to maternal radius artery and fetal umbilical blood and the rate of anoxia of newborn of 3 groups revealed no significant difference.
                The effectiveness of the combined spinal-epidural analgesia CSEA for analgesia labor is confirmed and has rarely side-effect, and it can be the first choice, and the inhalation of nitrous oxide can safely provide effective labor analgesia, too. A prospective randomised double blind study was carried out to compare the use of epidural methadone, morphine and bupivacaine for pain relief after Caesarean section. The results indicate that methadone is the most effective agent with few side effects. Subsequently this method was used routinely for postoperative analgesia in all patients undergoing Caesarean section. A retrospective study of 178 patients having this method of analgesia was carried out and indicated that epidural methadone is an effective and safe method of postoperative pain relief. Systemic opioids are commonly administered during labor, but their efficacy has been recently questioned. In addition, laboratory and clinical studies provide a strong rationale for combining mu- and kappa-opioid receptor agonists for analgesia. The authors therefore studied, using validated intensity and affective scales and definitions of effective pain relief, the efficacy of intravenous meperidine, butorphanol, and their combination for labor analgesia.
                Healthy women with singleton term pregnancy requesting analgesia during active labor were studied. Women were randomly assigned to receive 50 mg meperidine, 1 mg butorphanol, or 25 mg meperidine plus 0.5 mg butorphanol (n = 15/group). Pain intensity was assessed using a 0-10 numerical rating scale, and affective magnitude was assessed using a ratiometric descriptive scale before drug administration and between the sixth and seventh uterine contractions after drug administration.
                All three treatments reduced pain intensity equally. Butorphanol alone did not reduce pain affective magnitude, whereas the other treatments did. There was a significant correlation between reduction in pain intensity and affective magnitude in all groups, with greater reductions in affective magnitude than intensity. Overall, 29% of women exhibited clinically meaningful pain relief, with no difference among groups. Groups did not differ in incidence of opioid-induced adverse effects.
                These doses of meperidine and butorphanol do reduce pain intensity and affective magnitude, although a minority of patients achieve meaningful pain relief as defined in multiple patient populations, including laboring women. Combination of these drugs did not improve their therapeutic benefit. Current forms of analgesia often have significant side effects for women in labor. Bathing in warm water during labor has been reported to increase a woman's comfort level and cause a reduction in painful contractions. The objective of this trial was to compare immersion in warm water during labor with traditional pain management for a range of clinical and psychological outcomes.
                A prospective randomized controlled trial of 274 pregnant women, who were free from medical and obstetric complications and expecting a singleton pregnancy at term, was conducted at the Women's and Children's Hospital, a maternity tertiary referral center in Adelaide, South Australia. Women in labor were randomized to an experimental group who received immersion in a bath or to a nonbath group who received routine care. Pharmacological pain relief was the primary outcome that was measured, and secondary outcomes included maternal and neonatal clinical outcomes, factors relating to maternal and neonatal infectious morbidity, psychological outcomes, and satisfaction with care.
                The use of pharmacological analgesia was similar for both the experimental and control groups; 85 and 77 percent, respectively, used major analgesia. No statistical differences were observed in the proportion of women requiring induction and augmentation of labor or in rates of perineal trauma, length of labor, mode of delivery, or frequency of cardiotocographic trace abnormalities. Neonatal outcomes (birthweight, Apgar score, nursery care, meconium-stained liquor, cord pH estimations) revealed no statistically significant differences. Infants of bath group women required significantly more resuscitation than routine group women. Routine group women rated their overall experience of childbirth more positively than bath group women. Psychological outcomes, such as satisfaction with care or postnatal distress, were the same for both groups.
                Bathing in labor confers no clear benefits for the laboring woman but may contribute to adverse effects in the neonate. Two hundred and twenty-nine nulliparous women who requested regional analgesia during labour were given a combined spinal-epidural block. They were randomly allocated to stay in bed or spend at least 20 min of every hour out of bed. There was no significant difference in duration of labour, analgesia requirements, mode of delivery or condition of the baby between the groups. Ambulation appeared to be safe for the mother and baby. Maternal satisfaction with the low-dose combined spinal-epidural was high in both groups. Controversy concerning increased cesarean births as a result of epidural analgesia for relief of labor pain has been attributed, in large part, to difficulties interpreting published studies because of design flaws. In this study, the authors compared epidural analgesia to intravenous meperidine analgesia using patient-controlled devices during labor to evaluate the effects of labor epidural analgesia, primarily on the rate of cesarean deliveries while minimizing limitations attributable to study design.
                Four hundred fifty-nine nulliparous women in spontaneous labor at term were randomly assigned to receive either epidural analgesia or intravenous meperidine analgesia. Epidural analgesia was initiated with 0.25% bupivacaine and was maintained with 0.0625% bupivacaine and fentanyl 2 microg/ml at 6 ml/h with 5-ml bolus doses every 15 min as needed using a patient-controlled pump. Women in the intravenous analgesia group received 50 mg meperidine with 25 mg promethazine hydrochloride as an initial bolus, followed by 15 mg meperidine every 10 min as needed, using a patient-controlled pump. A written procedural manual that prescribed the intrapartum obstetric management was followed for each woman randomized in the study.
                A total of 226 women were randomized to receive epidural analgesia, and 233 women were randomized to receive intravenous meperidine analgesia. Protocol violations occurred in 8% (38 of 459) of women. There was no difference in the rate of cesarean deliveries between the two analgesia groups (epidural analgesia, 7% [16 of 226; 95% confidence interval, 4-11%] vs. intravenous meperidine analgesia, 9% [20 of 233; 95% confidence interval, 5-13%]; P = 0.61). Significantly more women randomized to epidural analgesia had forceps deliveries compared with those randomized to meperidine analgesia (12% [26 of 226] vs. 3% [7 of 233]; P < 0.001). Women who received epidural analgesia reported lower pain scores during labor and delivery compared with women who received intravenous meperidine analgesia.
                Epidural analgesia compared with intravenous meperidine analgesia during labor does not increase cesarean deliveries in nulliparous women. Recent reports have suggested that patient-controlled analgesia is an effective means of narcotic administration in postoperative patients. This prospective investigation was undertaken to determine the efficacy and safety of patient-controlled anesthesia infusion after cesarean section. During a recent ten-month period, 130 patients were assigned randomly to receive meperidine by pump or intramuscular injection. Meperidine consumption using the device varied widely to meet individual needs. Overdosage and drug dependence were not encountered with the prescribed drug concentrations. The patient-controlled analgesia method provided less sedation and more immediate pain relief without the need for painful injections. The additional cost of renting the infuser device was offset by combined patient and nursing satisfaction. We conclude that patient-controlled infusion of meperidine is safe and effective in satisfying individual patient needs after cesarean section. 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. Epidural administration of an opioid analgesic by means of a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) system was compared with conventional intravenous PCA for pain relief after cesarean delivery. One hundred seventeen healthy women were randomly assigned to receive hydromorphone either intravenously (IV-PCA) or epidurally (EPI-PCA) after cesarean delivery with epidural bupivacaine for operative anesthesia. The hydromorphone requirements were 3.4 and 4.2 times more in the IV-PCA group on the first (P less than 0.01) and second (P less than 0.01) postoperative days, respectively. The mean number (+/- SD) of PCA demands during the first 24 h after the operation was 105 (+/- 88) for the IV-PCA group and 33 (+/- 48) for the EPI-PCA group (P less than 0.01). This difference was also significant 24-48 h after surgery. Although the EPI-PCA group utilized significantly less opioid medication, pain and sedation scores were similar in the two treatment groups; however, a significantly larger percentage of patients in the IV-PCA group (46% vs 22%) stated that they felt drowsy during the first postoperative day. Pruritus was reported more frequently in the EPI-PCA (67%) than in the IV-PCA (33%) group. Nausea was experienced by only 10% of patients in the IV-PCA and 6% in the EPI-PCA group. There was no evidence of postoperative respiratory depression, with minimal oxygen saturation values of 93% (+/- 3%) and 94% (+/- 1%) in the IV-PCA and EPI-PCA groups, respectively.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) We randomly allocated 93 women in early active labour and requesting epidural analgesia to receive either epidural (n = 48) or combined spinal-epidural analgesia (n = 45). For epidural analgesia 15 ml of bupivacaine 0.1% with 75 micrograms of fentanyl were injected into the epidural space. For combined spinal-epidural analgesia 1 ml of bupivacaine 0.25% with 25 micrograms of fentanyl were injected into the subarachnoid space. For both groups subsequent top-ups of 10 ml of bupivacaine 0.1% with fentanyl 20 micrograms were given using a lightweight patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) pump with a lockout time of 30 min. We assessed analgesia and the degree of motor blockade and found no significant differences in pain or maternal satisfaction scores between the two groups. The time to first top-up was significantly longer in the epidural group than in the CSE group (p = 0.01). The combined spinal-epidural group had significantly greater motor blockade at 30 min than the epidural group (p = 0.01), but there was no difference after this. The PCEA machine failed completely twice and temporarily many times. We conclude that the combined spinal-epidural technique confers no advantages in early active labour. Also, a lightweight PCEA pump needs to be more reliable before we can recommend its use. To compare the combined spinal-epidural (CSE) technique with the epidural technique with regard to time to initiate and manage, motor block, onset of analgesia and satisfaction during labour.
                Upon requesting analgesia, 50 healthy term parturients were randomized in a prospective, double-blind fashion to receive either CSE analgesia or lumbar epidural analgesia in the labour floor of a university hospital at an academic medical centre. The epidural group (n = 24) received bupivacaine 0.0625%-fentanyl 0.0002% with 0.05 ml in 10 ml local anesthetic sodium bicarbonate 8.4% and epinephrine 1:200,000. The CSE group (n = 26) received intrathecal 25 microg fentanyl and 2.5 mg bupivacaine. Additional analgesia was provided upon maternal request.
                There were no differences (P>0.05) in time to perform either technique, motor blockade, or parturient satisfaction or in the number of times that the anesthesiologist was called to perform any intervention. Although the first sign of analgesia was not different between the two groups, the onset of complete analgesia was more rapid with the CSE technique (Visual Analogue Pain Score (VAPS) at five minutes < three: 26/26 vs. 17/24, P+/-0.001).
                Although epidural analgesia with a low concentration of local anesthetic and opioid mixture takes longer to produce complete analgesia, it is a satisfactory alternative to CSE. In a previous study on the effect of electro-acupuncture (EA) in combination with a paracervical block (PCB) as an analgesic method during oocyte aspiration in IVF treatment, EA appeared to increase the pregnancy rate. This study was designed to test the hypothesis that EA as an analgesic during oocyte aspiration would result in: (i) a better IVF pregnancy rate than with alfentanil; (ii) peroperative analgesia that was as good as that produced by alfentanil; (iii) less postoperative abdominal pain, nausea and stress; and (iv) a reduction in the use of additional analgesics. Neuropeptide Y (NPY) concentrations in follicular fluid (FF) were analysed when possible.
                In this prospective, randomized, multicentre clinical trial, 286 women undergoing oocyte aspiration were randomly allocated to the EA group (EA plus a PCB) or to the alfentanil group (alfentanil plus a PCB). No significant differences were found between the EA and alfentanil groups in any of the IVF variables. NPY concentrations in FF were significantly higher in the EA group compared with the alfentanil group. No correlation between pregnancy rate and NPY concentrations was found in either analgesic group. Both EA plus a PCB and alfentanil plus a PCB induced adequate peroperative analgesia during oocyte aspiration evaluated using the visual analogue scale. After 2 h, the EA group reported significantly less abdominal pain, other pain, nausea and stress than the alfentanil group. In addition, the EA group received significantly lower amounts of additional alfentanil than the alfentanil group.
                EA does not improve pregnancy rate in the present clinical situation. The observation that NPY concentrations in FF were higher in the EA group may be important for human ovarian steroidogenesis. The analgesic effects produced by EA are as good as those produced by conventional analgesics, and the use of opiate analgesics with EA is lower than when conventional analgesics alone are used. A double-blind study was carried out to compare the effect of submucous paracervical blockade using 12 mL 0.25% bupivacaine (55 women) to the effect of intramuscular injection of 75 mg meperidine (62 women) during the first stage of labor. All 117 were normal primiparous pregnancies. Seventy-eight percent of the women in the paracervical blockade group achieved full or acceptable pain relief against 31% in the meperidine group (P less than .01). Transient fetal bradycardia occurred in two cases in the paracervical blockade group and one in the meperidine group; all infants were born in good condition. Fetal distress, defined as an umbilical artery pH of 7.15 or less and/or a one-minute Apgar score of 7 or less was more frequent in the meperidine group (16 infants) than in the paracervical blockade group (six infants) (P less than .05). Submucous paracervical blockade is superior to intramuscular meperidine as pain relief during labor. Furthermore, meperidine results in more infants with asphyxia as compared with paracervical blockade. Whether epidural analgesia for labor prolongs the active-first and second labor stages and increases the risk of vacuum-assisted delivery is a controversial topic. Our study was conducted to answer the question: does lumbar epidural analgesia with lidocaine affect the progress of labor in our obstetric population?
                395 healthy, nulliparous women, at term, presented in spontaneous labor with a singleton vertex presentation. These patients were randomized to receive analgesia either, epidural with bolus doses of 1% lidocaine or intravenous, with meperidine 25 to 50 mg when their cervix was dilated to 4 centimeters. The duration of the active-first and second stages of labor and the neonatal apgar scores were recorded, in each patient. The total number of vacuum-assisted and cesarean deliveries were also measured.
                197 women were randomized to the epidural group. 198 women were randomized to the single-dose intravenous meperidine group. There was no statistical difference in rates of vacuum-assisted delivery rate. Cesarean deliveries, as a consequence of fetal bradycardia or dystocia, did not differ significantly between the groups. Differences in the duration of the active-first and the second stages of labor were not statistically significant. The number of newborns with 1-min and 5-min Apgar scores less than 7, did not differ significantly between both analgesia groups.
                Epidural analgesia with 1% lidocaine does not prolong the active-first and second stages of labor and does not increase vacuum-assisted or cesarean delivery rate. Naloxone 40 mug was administered intravenously one minute after birth to 20 out of 44 neonates whose mother had been given pethidine in labour. These neonates were compared with 20 others whose mothers had had only lumbar epidural block. Alveolar PCO2, alveolar ventilation, and ventilatory rate were measured 10 and 30 minutes after birth. The untreated neonates of mothers who had had pethidine showed significant ventilatory depression compared with infants in the epidural and naloxone-treated groups. The naloxone-treated neonates were comparable with the epidural group, although the effects of naloxone were diminishing at 30 minutes. Naloxone is an effective narcotic antagonist which should be considered to be the drug of choice for treating narcotic depression in the neonate. 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. A number of recent studies have suggested that the analgesic effects of highly lipid-soluble opioids are similar when these agents are administered either epidurally or intravenously. We sought to test whether the lipid-soluble opioid sufentanil was more effective when administered intrathecally than when administered epidurally or intravenously. Twenty-four women during active labor received sufentanil 10 micrograms either intrathecally (n = 9), epidurally (n = 8), or intravenously (n = 7), using a combined spinal-epidural technique. The sufentanil was administered alone, without concomitant local anesthetics. Analgesia was assessed using the visual analogue score as well as the time elapsed from the administration of study drug to the patient's request for additional analgesia via the epidural catheter (bupivacaine 0.25%). The median duration of analgesia (median, interquartile range) was 84 (70-92) min in the intrathecal group, 30 (23-32) min in the epidural group, and 34 (17-30) min in the intravenous group (P < 0.001). The intrathecal group showed rapid and significant decrease in visual analogue scale scores, whereas visual analogue scale scores in the other two groups did not decrease and remained significantly elevated compared to those of the intrathecal group at all observation points. Side effects were limited to pruritus in 3 patients (2 moderate and 1 severe) in the intrathecal group. No patient developed post-dural puncture headache. We conclude that sufentanil 10 micrograms intrathecally provides rapid and effective analgesia of 1-2-h duration during labor. Epidural and intravenous use of this dose of sufentanil did not provide evidence of satisfactory analgesia.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) It is often assumed that subarachnoid administration of local anesthetics produces a more profound blockade than epidural anesthesia. Furthermore, the addition of fentanyl has been reported to increase preferentially intraoperative analgesia. In the present study we set out to study these two issues in a randomized and controlled study with respect to perceived pain and discomfort during surgery and postoperative pain.
                In the present study, 100 parturients subjected to elective cesarean section, 34 nullipara and 66 multipara, received one out of four combinations of the local anesthetic bupivacaine and the opioid fentanyl; group A--bupivacaine 12.5 mg + 10 micrograms fentanyl subarachnoidally, group B--bupivacaine 12.5 mg + saline subarachnoidally, group C--bupivacaine 100 mg + 100 micrograms fentanyl epidurally, group D--bupivacaine 100 mg + saline epidurally; N = 25 in each group. Pain intensity and discomfort during surgery was assessed with a visual analogue scale (VAS). Postoperative pain intensity and need for analgesics postoperatively, ketobemidone, was registered for 24 h following surgery.
                Intraoperative pain intensity and discomfort did not differ significantly between parturients in any of the four groups Postoperative pain was significantly more intense in parturients receiving local anesthetics subarachnoidally as compared to the epidural groups during the first 6-h period. This difference was also reflected in a significantly increased consumption of analgesics during this period. No significant differences between the groups were observed with regard to hemodynamics (blood pressure), respiration (oxygen saturation) or other effects such as nausea or itching. All neonates had normal Apgar and neonatal adaptive capacity scores (NACS).
                We conclude that subarachnoidal (12.5 mg) and epidural (100 mg) injections with bupivacaine both produced adequate anesthetic quality in women undergoing elective cesarean section. The addition of fentanyl (10 micrograms subarachnoidally or 100 micrograms epidurally) did not significantly improve the quality of these already profound blockades. 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. To examine if ilioinguinal-iliohypogastric nerve block could reduce the need for post-Cesarean delivery morphine analgesia and thus reduce the incidence of opioid related adverse-effects.
                A multi-level technique for performing the nerve block with bupivacaine was developed and then utilized in this two-part study. Part one was a retrospective assessment of Cesarean delivery patients with and without ilioinguinal-iliohypogastric blocks to determine if the technique reduced patient controlled analgesia morphine use and thus would warrant further study. The second phase was a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial to compare post-Cesarean morphine use and the appearance of opioid-related side effects between the anesthetic and placebo-injected groups.
                Both phases demonstrated that our method of ilioinguinal-iliohypogastric nerve block significantly reduced the amount of iv morphine used by patients during the 24 hr following Cesarean delivery. In the retrospective assessment, morphine use was 49 +/- 30 mg in the block group vs 79 +/- 25 mg in the no block group (P = 0.0063). For the prospective trial, patients who received nerve blocks with bupivacaine had a similar result, self-administering 48 +/- 27 mg of morphine over 24 hr compared to 67 +/- 28 mg administered by patients who received infiltrations of saline. However, despite the significant decrease in morphine use, there was no reduction in opioid-related adverse effects: the incidences of nausea were 41% and 46% (P = 0.70) and for itching were 79% and 63% (P = 0.25) in the placebo and nerve block groups, respectively.
                A multi-level ilioinguinal-iliohypogastric nerve block technique can reduce the amount of systemic morphine required to control post-Cesarean delivery pain but this reduction was not associated with a reduction of opioid related adverse effects in our study group. We compared the incidence of Caesarean delivery in nulliparous women randomized to receive epidural analgesia with those randomized to intramuscular (i.m.) pethidine. On admission to the delivery suite in established labour, 802 nulliparae had already agreed to be randomized with respect to their first analgesia. One hundred and eighty-eight women required either no analgesia or 50% nitrous oxide in oxygen (Entonox) only. Of the remaining 614 women, 310 were randomly allocated to receive i.m. pethidine up to 300 mg and 304 to receive epidural bupivacaine. Labour management was standardized according to the criteria for active management of labour. The intention-to-treat analysis showed similar Caesarean section rates in those randomized to epidural (12%) or pethidine analgesia (13%). The difference in Caesarean rate was -1.1% with 95% confidence intervals from -6.3% to +4.1%. The normal vaginal delivery rates were similar (epidural, 59%; pethidine, 61%). 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. To investigate possible short and long term side effects of epidural analgesia, compared with non-epidural analgesia for pain relief in labour.
                Randomised controlled study, with long term follow up by questionnaire. Analysis by intention-to-treat.
                Busy maternity unit within a district general hospital in England.
                Three hundred and sixty nine primigravid women in labour were included (randomised allocation: epidural n = 184, non-epidural n = 185).
                Backache at three and twelve months after delivery, instrumental delivery rates and maternal opinion of pain relief in labour.
                No significant differences were found in the reported incidence of backache between the groups at three months: middle backache [22% vs 20%, chi2 = 0.057, P = 0.81; odds ratio (95% CI) 1.4(0.9-2.3)]; low backache [35% vs 34%, chi2 = 0.009, P = 0.92; odds ratio (95% CI) 1.0(0.6-1.6)]. Nor were there significant differences at 12 months: [middle backache 16% vs 16%, chi2 = 0.013, P = 0.91; odds ratio (95% CI) 1.0(0.5-1.8)]; or low backache [35% vs 27%, chi2 = 1.91, P = 0.17; odds ratio (95% CI) 1.4(0.9-2.3)]. The incidence of instrumental delivery was somewhat higher in the epidural group [30% vs 19%, odds ratio (95% CI) 1.77(1.09-2.86)]. Maternal satisfaction was not significantly different between the groups.
                This study provided no evidence to support the suggestion of a direct association between the use of epidural anaesthesia in labour and the incidence of long term backache. Despite a significant proportion of women in each group not receiving their allocated analgesia, a significant difference in terms of instrumental delivery rates remained. Satisfaction in both groups of women was high. We performed a prospective, randomized, double-blind study of continuous epidural analgesia for 72 hours after major abdominal procedures. Patients were randomly assigned to one of five treatment groups: epidural morphine, epidural bupivacaine, a combination of morphine and bupivacaine, epidural saline solution, and no epidural catheter. All patients received supplemental morphine sulfate or meperidine hydrochloride, intramuscularly or intravenously, as needed. Epidural infusion was begun at 2 to 4 ml/hr, depending on age and height, with two increments of 1 ml/hr allowed if pain relief was insufficient. All pain management decisions were made by nurses, who also monitored epidural function. Performance was measured four ways: pain as measured at regular intervals in the 72-hour period with a visual analog, pain as measured after 72 hours with the McGill Pain Questionnaire, amount of supplemental narcotics needed, and recovery of respiratory function and ambulation as percent of preoperative levels. The group that received the combination of morphine and bupivacaine did best on all measures; in most instances the difference between the results seen with the combination regimen and those seen with saline solution or no catheter were significant at the 0.05 level. With the exception of pruritus, complications were evenly distributed among all treatment groups, including noncatheterized controls. We conclude that epidural analgesia with the combination of morphine and bupivacaine is safe, is easily managed, and gives pain relief superior to that provided by traditional, systemic administration of narcotics. To determine if nulliparous women intending to have epidural analgesia have a similar labour profile and delivery outcome to women who intend to have their labour managed using alternative forms of pain relief.
                A prospective randomised controlled clinical trial conducted at a tertiary obstetric institution. Nulliparous women intending to deliver vaginally with a term singleton fetus were eligible for recruitment.
                1159 women were recruited, of whom 992 were subsequently randomised to receive continuous midwifery support (CMS) or epidural analgesia (EPI) on presentation for delivery. The duration of labour was shorter in the CMS group compared with EPI (10.7 hours (inter quartile (IQ) 7.0,15.2) versus 11.4 hours (IQ 8.2,15.2), p = 0.039). The median duration of the first stage was 8.9 hours (IQ 6,12.5) versus 9.5 hours (IQ 7,12.7) (p = 0.069), and the median duration of the second stage was 1.33 hours (IQ 0.6,2.5) versus 1.48 hours (IQ 0.77,2.6) (p = 0.034). The requirement for oxytocin augmentation in spontaneous labour was 39.8% CMS versus 46.2% EPI (p = 0.129). There was no significant difference in the caesarean section rates. The need for any operative delivery was significantly lower in CMS (43.9% CMS versus 51.5% EPI, p = 0.019).
                Nulliparous women have a high usage of epidural analgesia, regardless of their prelabour intentions. In women who do not intend to use epidural analgesia, the temporal delay in insertion compared with those who use epidural analgesia as their primary analgesic modality is associated with a small but statistically significant reduction in overall labour duration and operative delivery rates. Butorphanol (1 mg and 2 mg) and meperidine (40 mg and 80 mg), given intravenously, were evaluated for analgesic efficacy and safety in a double-blind randomized study employing 200 consenting pre-partum patients in moderate to severe pain during the late first stage of labour. Both drugs provided adequate relief of pain to the mothers. There was no significant difference in the rate of cervical dilation, the foetal heart rate, the Apgar score, pain relief or neonatal neurobehavioural scores betweeen those receiving butorphanol and those receiving meperidine. Twenty-two mothers who received butorphanol and eleven who received meperidine nursed their infants with no adverse effects observed. Side-effects were generally infrequent in this study; however, more side-effects were reported by the patients and observed by the investigator in the meperidine-treated cases (13%) than in the cases treated with butorphanol (2%). nan In order to test the analgesic efficacy of Anesthelec (transcutaneous cranial electrical stimulation with Limoge currents) during labour and delivery, a double blind study was performed in 20 cases for whom analgesia was necessary. In 10 cases Anesthelec was used with the Limoge currents on and in 10 cases as a sham. Labour and delivery were carried out by a medical team different from that which set up the Anesthelec. The results showed that this method, with or without nitrous oxide inhalation, decreased by 80% the number of epidural and general anaesthesias that would otherwise have been unavoidable. To define the effects of this new method, maternal and foetal parameters of 50 deliveries carried out under Anesthelec were compared with 50 deliveries carried out under epidural analgesia. Anesthelec was used only if analgesia was required. This study was a retrospective comparison between two similar non paired series. Despite the fact that analgesia obtained with Anesthelec was less powerful than with epidural analgesia, this method showed many advantages: total safety for the child and the mother, easy utilization, shorter labour time, decreased number of instrumental extractions and potentially reduced costs. Good acceptance and satisfaction for the mother should allow a rapid evolution of this new method.
Parenteral opioids provide some relief from pain in labour but are associated with adverse effects. Maternal satisfaction with opioid analgesia was largely unreported but appeared moderate at best. This review needs to be examined alongside related Cochrane reviews examining pain management in labour. More research is needed to determine which analgesic intervention is most effective, and provides greatest satisfaction to women with acceptable adverse effects for mothers and their newborn.