The comparison of the effect of non-pharmacological pain relief and pharmacological analgesia with remifentanil on fear of childbirth and postpartum depression: a randomized controlled clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Childbirth may be associated with psychological, social, and emotional effects and provide the background for women's health or illness throughout their life. This research aimed at comparing the impact of non-pharmacological pain relief and pharmacological analgesia with remifentanil on childbirth fear and postpartum depression. MATERIALS AND METHOD: This randomized clinical trial with two parallel arms was conducted on 66 women with term pregnancy referred to Taleghani Hospital in Tabriz for vaginal delivery during September 2022 to September 2023. First, all of the eligible participants were selected through Convenience Sampling. Then, they were randomly assigned into two groups of pharmacological analgesia with remifentanil and non-pharmacological analgesia with a ratio of 1:1 using stratified block randomization based on the number of births. Before the intervention, fear of childbirth (FOC) was measured using Delivery Fear Scale (DFS) between 4 and 6 cm cervical dilatation. Pain and fear during labor in dilatation of 8 cm were measured in both groups using VAS and DFS. After delivery, FOC was assessed using Delivery Fear Scale (W DEQ Version B) and postpartum depression using the Edinburgh's postpartum depression scale (EPDS). Significance level was considered 0.05. Mean difference (MD) was compared with Independent T-test and ANCOVA pre and post intervention. RESULTS: The mean score of FOC in the non-pharmacological analgesia group was significantly lower than that in the pharmacological analgesia group after the intervention by controlling the effect of the baseline score (MD: -6.33, 95%, Confidence Interval (CI): -12.79 to -0.12, p = 0.04). In the postpartum period, the mean score of FOC in the non-pharmacological analgesia group was significantly lower than that in the pharmacological analgesia group after controlling the effect of the baseline score (MD: -21.89; 95% CI: -35.12 to -8.66; p = 0.002). The mean score of postpartum depression in the non-pharmacological analgesia group was significantly lower than that in the pharmacological analgesia group (MD: -1.93, 95% CI: -3.48 to -0.37, p = 0.01). TRIAL REGISTRATION: Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT): IRCT20170506033834N10. Date of registration: 05/07/2022 Date of first registration: 05/07/2022. URL: https://www.irct.ir/trial/61030; Date of recruitment start date05/07/2022. CONCLUSION: The study results indicated a reduction in FOC and postpartum depression among parturient women receiving non-pharmacological strategies with active participation in childbirth compared to women receiving pharmacological analgesia. Owing to the possible side effects of pharmacological methods for mother and fetus, non-pharmacological strategies with active participation of the mother in childbirth are recommended to reduce the FOC and postpartum depression.

Socio-economic disadvantage and utilisation of labour epidural analgesia in Scotland: a population-based study†.

Socio-economic deprivation is associated with adverse maternal and childhood outcomes. Epidural analgesia, the gold standard for labour analgesia, may improve maternal well-being. We assessed the association of socio-economic status with utilisation of epidural analgesia and whether this differed when epidural analgesia was advisable for maternal safety. This was a population-based study of NHS data for all women in labour in Scotland between 1 January 2007 and 23 October 2020, excluding elective caesarean sections. Socio-economic status deciles were defined using the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation. Medical conditions for which epidural analgesia is advisable for maternal safety (medical indications) and contraindications were defined according to national guidelines. Of 593,230 patients in labour, 131,521 (22.2%) received epidural analgesia. Those from the most deprived areas were 16% less likely to receive epidural analgesia than the most affluent (relative risk 0.84 [95%CI 0.82-0.85]), with the inter-decile mean change in receiving epidural analgesia estimated at -2% ([95%CI -2.2% to -1.7%]). Among the 21,219 deliveries with a documented medical indication for epidural analgesia, the socio-economic gradient persisted (relative risk 0.79 [95%CI 0.75-0.84], inter-decile mean change in receiving epidural analgesia -2.5% [95%CI -3.1% to -2.0%]). Women in the most deprived areas with a medical indication for epidural analgesia were still less likely (absolute risk 0.23 [95%CI 0.22-0.24]) to receive epidural analgesia than women from the most advantaged decile without a medical indication (absolute risk 0.25 [95%CI 0.24-0.25]). Socio-economic deprivation is associated with lower utilisation of epidural analgesia, even when epidural analgesia is advisable for maternal safety. Ensuring equitable access to an intervention that alleviates pain and potentially reduces adverse outcomes is crucial.

SPAM-sub partual analgesia with meptazinol: a prospective cohort study comparing intramuscular with intravenous administration.

PURPOSE: Safe and effective analgesia sub partu is one of the central issues in optimizing vaginal delivery birth experiences. Meptazinol is a common opiate approved for treating labor pain in the first stage of labor. According to the manufacturer, manual meptazinol can be applied intramuscularly or intravenously. The aim of this study was to compare the two application methods in terms of efficacy in pain relief, occurrence of side effects and treatment satisfaction. METHODS: 132 patients with singleton term pregnancies and intended vaginal delivery, receiving meptazinol during first stage of labor were included in this prospective cohort study from 05/2020 to 01/2021. We evaluated effectiveness in pain relief and treatment satisfaction using numeric rating scales (NRS) and documented the occurrence of adverse effects. Chi-square test or Fisher exact test were used to compare categorical data and Mann-Whitney U test to compare continuous data between the two treatment groups. Statistical analysis was done by SPSS 27.0. A p value < 0.05 was considered to indicate statistical significance (two tailed). RESULTS: Meptazinol decreased labor pain significantly from a NRS of 8 (IQR 8-10) to 6 (IQR 4.75-8) in both treatment groups with no difference in effectiveness between the groups. Frequency of effective pain reduction of a decrease of 2 or more on the NRS did not differ between groups (39.4% vs 54.5%, p = 0.116), as the occurrence of adverse effects. 12% of the newborns were admitted to NICU, the median NApH was 7.195. CONCLUSION: Meptazinol significantly reduces labor pain regardless of the method of application: intramuscular or intravenous. According to our data, no preferable route could be identified. The comparably poorer perinatal outcome in our study cohort hinders us to confirm that meptazinol is safe and can be recommended without restrictions.

Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of pregnant women regarding epidural analgesia: a multicentre study from a developing country.

BACKGROUND: Epidural analgesia has emerged as one of the best methods that can be used to reduce labour pain. This study was conducted to assess awareness, attitudes, and practices of pregnant women who visited maternity and antenatal healthcare clinics about epidural analgesia during normal vaginal birth. METHODS: This multicentre study was conducted in a cross-sectional design among pregnant women using a pre-tested questionnaire. The study population in this study was pregnant women who visited maternity and antenatal healthcare clinics in Palestine. RESULTS: In this study, a total of 389 pregnant women completed the questionnaire. Of the pregnant women, 381 (97.9%) were aware of the existence of epidural analgesia, 172 (44.2%) had already used epidural analgesia, and 57 (33.1%) experienced complications as a result of epidural analgesia. Of the pregnant women, 308 (79.2%) stated that epidural analgesia should be available during vaginal birth. Of the pregnant women, 243 (62.5%) stated that they would use epidural analgesia if offered for free or covered by insurance. Multivariate logistic regression showed that women who were younger than 32 years, who have used epidural analgesia, and those who stated that epidural analgesia should be available during vaginal birth were 2.78-fold (95% CI: 1.54-5.04), 4.96-fold (95% CI: 2.71-9.10), and 13.57-fold (95% CI: 6.54-28.16) more likely to express willingness to use epidural analgesia, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women had high awareness of the existence, moderate knowledge, and positive attitudes towards epidural analgesia for normal vaginal birth. Future studies should focus on educating pregnant women about all approaches that can be used to reduce labour pain including their risks and benefits.

This study focused on what pregnant women at maternity clinics in Palestine know and think about getting epidural shots during normal births to help lessen the pain when women give birth. Most of the pregnant women have heard about epidural shots and said that these shots should be offered during normal birth. Most of the pregnant women said that they would consider using epidural shots once offered for free or covered by insurance. Younger women, those who had used an epidural before, and those who thought epidurals should be available during birth were more likely to want to use an epidural again.

Simple Yet Effective-Sterile Water Injections to Treat Labor Pain in the Transport Environment.

Sterile water injections (SWI) is a nonpharmacologic pain relief option to treat back pain in labor. This case report describes and discusses the use of SWI in the context of an obstetric retrieval of a 29-year-old woman who was transferred by the Royal Flying Doctor Service South Eastern Section. It provides an overview of SWI, discusses the relevance for medical transport, and offers suggestions for medical transport professionals.

Pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic options for pain relief during labor: an expert review.

Labor pain is among the most severe types of physical pain that women may experience during their lifetime. Thus, pain relief is an essential part of medical care during childbirth. Epidural analgesia is considered to be the most efficient method of pain relief during labor. Nevertheless, patient preferences, contraindications, limited availability, and technical failure may require the use of alternative pain reliving methods during labor including systemic pharmacologic agents, and nonpharmacologic methods. Nonpharmacologic methods for pain alleviation during vaginal birth have become popular over the years, either as a complement to pharmacologic agents or at times as the principal therapy. Methods such as relaxation techniques (ie, yoga, hypnosis, and music), manual techniques (ie, massage, reflexology, and shiatsu), acupuncture, birthing ball, and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation are considered safe, although the evidence supporting their effectiveness for pain relief is not as robust as it is for pharmacologic agents. Systemic pharmacologic agents are mostly administered by inhalation (nitrous oxide) or through the parenteral route. These agents include opioids such as meperidine, nalbuphine, tramadol, butorphanol, morphine, and remifentanil, and non-opioid agents such as parenteral acetaminophen and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Systemic pharmacologic agents suggest a diverse armamentarium of medication for pain management during labor. Their efficacy in treating pain associated with labor varies, and some continue to be used even though they have not been proven effective for pain relief. In addition, the maternal and perinatal side effects differ markedly among these agents. There is a relative abundance of data regarding the effectiveness of analgesic drugs compared with epidural, but the data regarding comparisons among the different types of alternative analgesic agents are scarce, and there is no consistency regarding the drug of choice for women who do not receive epidural pain management. This review aims to present the available data regarding the effectiveness of the different methods of relieving pain during labor other than epidural. The data presented are mainly based on recent level I evidence regarding pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic methods for pain relief during labor.

Factors associated with the intention of pregnant women to give birth with epidural analgesia: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: In Belgium most women receive epidural analgesia during labour. Although, it offers satisfactory pain relief during labour, the risk on a series of adverse advents has been reported. The objective of this study was to determine factors associated with the intention of pregnant women, anticipating a vaginal birth, of requesting epidural analgesia during labour. METHODS: A cross-sectional study, using an online self-report questionnaire was performed, including socio-demographic and personal details. Associated factors were examined with the HEXACO-60 questionnaire, the Mental Health Inventory-5, the Tilburg Pregnancy Distress Scale and the Labour Pain Relief Attitude Questionnaire for pregnant women. The level of intention to request epidural analgesia was based on two questions: Do you intend to ask for epidural analgesia (1) at the start of your labour; (2) at some point during labour? Data were collected predominantly during the second and third trimester of pregnancy. Descriptive analysis and a multiple linear regression analysis were performed. RESULTS: 949 nulliparous (45.9%) and multiparous (54.1%) pregnant women, living in Flanders (Dutch-speaking part of Belgium) anticipating a vaginal birth completed the questionnaires. Birth-related anxiety (ß 0.096, p < 0.001), the attitude that because of the impact of pregnancy on the body, asking for pain relief is normal (ß 0.397, p < 0.001) and feeling more self-confident during labour when having pain relief (ß 0.034, p < 0.001) show a significant positive relationship with the intention for intrapartum epidural analgesia. The length of the gestational period (ß - 0.056, p 0.015), having a midwife as the primary care giver during pregnancy (ß - 0.048, p 0.044), and considering the partner in decision-making about pain relief (ß - 0.112, p < 0.001) show a significant negative relationship with the intention level of epidural analgesia. The explained variability by the multiple regression model is 54%. CONCLUSIONS: A discussion during pregnancy about the underlying reason for epidural analgesia allows maternity care providers and partners to support women with pain management that is in line with women's preferences. Because women's intentions vary during the gestational period, pain relief should be an issue of conversation throughout pregnancy.

Comparison of intravenous paracetamol infusion versus intramuscular tramadol as labor analgesia: a randomized control trial.

PURPOSE: Labor pain is one of the most agonizing pains experienced by all delivered women. Many pharmacological agents used in labor analgesia require intense monitoring facilities, which are not available in routine obstetric practice in low-resource settings. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of intravenous (IV) paracetamol and intramuscular (IM) tramadol on labor pain relief, labor progression, and maternal and neonatal outcomes. METHODS: This randomized drug trial was carried out on 110 women divided into two groups. Group A women received 1000 mg of IV paracetamol, and Group B women received 100 mg of IM tramadol during the active phase of labor. Pain intensity was assessed by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) at intervals till 120 min of delivery. The maternal and neonatal outcomes were recorded. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant fall in pain score till 180 min of drug administration in the paracetamol group and 120 min in the tramadol group. At 180 min and 240 min, paracetamol is more effective than tramadol (p value 0.004 at 180 min and 0.0119 at 240 min). There were significantly low pain score levels at 60 min of delivery in the paracetamol group (p value-0.004). Nausea and vomiting were significantly higher in the tramadol group (p value 0.000013). CONCLUSION: Compared to IM tramadol, IV paracetamol has a longer duration of action and fewer maternal side effects, making it suitable for parenteral analgesia in labor. Due to a better safety profile, there is no need for intense maternal and fetal monitoring with IV paracetamol. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials Registry-India (CTRI registration number-CTRI /2019/05/019244).

Beyond Fear: Unveiling the Relationship Between Fear of Childbirth and Pharmacological Pain Relief.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacological analgesia is the dominant method for pain relief in labor. Fear of childbirth (FOC) may significantly affect women's preferences for and usage of pharmacological analgesia. AIM: This study aimed to investigate the relationship between FOC in late pregnancy and preferences for, as well as actual use of, pharmacological analgesia among nulliparous and multiparous women, accounting for confounding factors. METHODS: A total of 1,300 women participated in the study, completing questionnaires assessing preferences for pharmacological analgesia, FOC, perception of labor pain, social support, coping styles, and demographic variables. The actual use of pharmacological analgesia was followed up. The data were analyzed using univariate and multivariate regression analyses. RESULTS: Univariate analysis revealed that women with moderate to severe FOC had a stronger preference for pharmacological analgesia compared to those with none to mild FOC. However, multivariate analysis showed no direct association between FOC and actual usage of pharmacological analgesia. Instead, a stronger preference for pharmacological analgesia increased the likelihood of its actual usage during labor. CONCLUSIONS: Our study underscores the effect of FOC on preferences for pharmacological analgesia and its potential influence on actual usage during labor. Healthcare providers should consider women's FOC and preferences when evaluating pain management options. Targeted interventions focusing on promoting non-pharmacological techniques should be implemented to optimize labor pain management for women, particularly nulliparous women.

Outcomes to measure the effects of pharmacological interventions for pain management for women during labour and birth: a review of systematic reviews and randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacological pain management options can relieve women's pain during labour and birth. Trials of these interventions have used a wide variety of outcomes, complicating meaningful comparisons of their effects. To facilitate better assessment of the effectiveness of labour pain management in trials and meta-analyses, consensus about key outcomes and the development of a core outcome set is essential. OBJECTIVE: To identify all outcomes used in studies of pharmacological pain management interventions during labour and birth. DESIGN: A review of systematic reviews and their included randomised controlled trials was undertaken. SEARCH STRATEGY: Cochrane CENTRAL was searched to identify all Cochrane systematic reviews describing pharmacological pain management options for labour and birth. Search terms included 'pain management', 'labour' and variants, with no limits on year of publication or language. SELECTION CRITERIA: Cochrane reviews and randomised controlled trials contained within these reviews were included, provided they compared a pharmacological intervention with other pain management options, placebo or no treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: All outcomes reported by reviews or trials were extracted and tabulated, with frequencies of individual outcomes reported. MAIN RESULTS: Nine Cochrane reviews and 227 unique trials were included. In total, 146 unique outcomes were identified and categorised into maternal, fetal, neonatal, child, health service, provider's perspective or economic outcome domains. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes of pharmacological pain management interventions during labour and birth vary widely between trials. The standardisation of trial outcomes would permit the assessment of meta-analyses for best clinical practice. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Outcomes to measure pharmacological pain management options during labour are highly variable and require standardisation.

Fentanyl for labour pain management: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Labour pain has been identified as an important reason for women to prefer caesarean section (CS). Fentanyl is one of the short acting opioids recommended by World Health Organization for pain relief during labour. This study aimed to identify and describe the available evidence on the use of fentanyl (monotherapy) for labour pain management by any routes of administration or regime. METHODS: We included the records published until 31 December 2021 which reported administration of fentanyl to women with normal labour for labour pain relief. Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by another reviewer using a standardised agreement form. We mapped and presented data descriptively in figure and tabular format. RESULTS: We included 51 records from 49 studies in our scoping review. The studies were conducted in 12 countries, mostly high-income countries. The study designs of the 51 included records were varied as follows: 38 (74.5%) experimental studies (35 randomised controlled trials and three quasi-experimental studies), and 12 (23.5%) observational studies (five retrospective cohort studies, four prospective cohort studies, two retrospective descriptive studies, and one descriptive study) and one qualitative study. Of the included records, six used intranasal fentanyl, five used subcutaneous fentanyl, 18 (35.3%) used intravenous fentanyl, 18 (35.3%) used intrathecal fentanyl, and nine used epidural fentanyl. Many records compared fentanyl with another analgesic agent while five records (9.8%) had no comparison group and seven records (13.7%) compared with no analgesia group. The doses of fentanyl varied by routes, study and the requirement depended on the women. Pain assessment was the most frequent outcome measure presented in the records (78.4%). Only nine records (17.6%) investigated women's satisfaction about labour pain relief using fentanyl and seven records (13.7%) reported the effect of fentanyl on breastfeeding. The most common reported neonatal outcomes were foetal heart rate (33 records, 64.7%) and Apgar score (32 records, 62.7%). CONCLUSION: There is limited primary evidence especially randomised controlled trials to evaluate the effectiveness and harms of different routes of fentanyl in low- or middle-income countries. There is a need for high-quality research to establish the most effective route of fentanyl and associated effects for evidence-based international guidelines.

Programmed intermittent epidural bolus for labour analgesia: a randomized controlled trial comparing bolus delivery speeds of 125 mL·hr-1 versus 250 mL·hr-1.

PURPOSE: Programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) provides better analgesia for labour pain than continuous epidural infusion does. Nevertheless, commonly used PIEB regimens are associated with high sensory block. We hypothesized that a PIEB technique with slower bolus delivery speed would produce lower sensory levels. METHODS: We recruited term nulliparous women with singleton pregnancies during the first stage of labour. All participants had an American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status score of II-III, had epidural catheters placed at L3/4, and had epidural analgesia maintained with PIEB 10 mL every 40 min using 0.0625% bupivacaine with fentanyl 2 µg·mL-1. Women were randomized to receive PIEB delivered at 250 mL·hr-1 (G250) or 125 mL·hr-1 (G125). The study was completed six hours after the loading dose or at full cervical dilatation, whichever occurred first. The primary outcome was the presence of sensory block to ice ≥ T6 in at least one assessment during the study period (maximum six hours). RESULTS: We analyzed data from 90 women. The proportion of women presenting sensory block ≥ T6 at any time was not different between G125 and G250 groups (60.0% vs 64.4%; difference, -4.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -24.5 to 15.6; P = 0.66). The median [interquartile range] highest sensory block level was also not different between G125 and G250 groups (T6 [T7-T5] vs T5 [T7-T5], P = 0.39). Women in the G125 group had a lower incidence of hypotension than women in the G250 group did (11.1% vs 33.3%; difference, -22.2%; 95% CI, -38.8 to -5.67; P = 0.01). Quality of analgesia and patient satisfaction were not different between groups. CONCLUSION: The maintenance of epidural analgesia with a PIEB delivery speed of 125 mL·hr-1 did not produce lower sensory block levels when compared with 250 mL·hr-1. The slower injection speed regimen was associated with lower incidence of hypotension, but this secondary finding warrants confirmation in a future trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03236298); registered 1 August 2017.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: L'administration programmée intermittente de bolus périduraux (PIEB, pour programmed intermittent epidural bolus) fournit une meilleure analgésie pour la douleur du travail que l'analgésie péridurale par perfusion continue. Néanmoins, les régimes de PIEB couramment utilisés sont associés à un bloc sensoriel élevé. Nous avons émis l'hypothèse qu'une technique de PIEB avec une vitesse d'administration plus lente du bolus produirait des niveaux sensoriels inférieurs. MéTHODE: Nous avons recruté des femmes nullipares à terme ayant des grossesses uniques au cours de la première étape du travail obstétrical. Toutes les participantes avaient un score de statut physique II-III de l'American Society of Anesthesiologists, des cathéters périduraux placés au niveau L3/4 et une analgésie péridurale maintenue avec des PIEB de 10 mL de bupivacaïne 0,0625 % et de 2 µg·mL-1 de fentanyl, administrés toutes les 40 minutes. Les femmes ont été randomisées à recevoir des PIEB administrés à une vitesse de 250 mL·h-1 (G250) ou 125 mL·h-1 (G125). L'étude se terminait six heures après la dose de charge ou lors de la dilatation cervicale complète, selon la première éventualité. Le critère d'évaluation principal était la présence d'un bloc sensoriel à la glace ≥ T6 lors d'au moins une évaluation au cours de la période à l'étude (pour un maximum de six heures). RéSULTATS: Nous avons analysé les données de 90 femmes. La proportion de femmes présentant un bloc sensoriel ≥ T6 à tout moment n'était pas différente entre les groupes G125 et G250 (60,0 % vs 64,4 %; différence, -4,4 %; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 %, -24,5 à 15,6; P = 0,66). Le niveau médian [écart interquartile] le plus élevé de bloc sensoriel n'était pas non plus différent entre les groupes G125 et G250 (T6 [T7-T5] vs T5 [T7-T5], P = 0,39). Les femmes du groupe G125 avaient une incidence d'hypotension plus faible que les femmes du groupe G250 (11,1 % vs 33,3 %; différence, -22,2 %; IC 95 %, -38,8 à -5,67; P = 0,01). La qualité de l'analgésie et la satisfaction des patientes n'étaient pas différentes d'un groupe à l'autre. CONCLUSION: Le maintien de l'analgésie péridurale avec une vitesse d'administration des PIEB de 125 mL·h-1 n'a pas entraîné de taux de blocs sensoriels inférieurs par rapport à une vitesse de 250 mL·h-1. Le régime de vitesse d'injection plus lente a été associé à une incidence plus faible d'hypotension, mais cette constatation secondaire mérite d'être confirmée dans une étude future. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: www.ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03236298); enregistrée le 1er août 2017.

Dural puncture epidural versus conventional epidural analgesia for labor: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies.

Dural puncture epidural (DPE) technique is a modification of the conventional epidural (EP) technique in that the dura is intentionally punctured with a spinal needle but without any spinal injection. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the benefits and risks associated with the DPE technique for labor analgesia. Randomized trials comparing DPE analgesia with EP analgesia for labor pain relief were systematically searched in the database of Medline, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Web of Science, and China Biology Medicine till 1st August 2021. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients with satisfactory pain relief following DPE or EP analgesia, which was defined as visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores ≤ 3/10 (or 30/100) measured 10 min and 20 min after initiation of labor analgesia. Totally ten trials with 1099 patients were included in this review. DPE technique increased the percentage of patients with VAS pain score ≤ 3/10 (or 30/100) both at 10 min (RR 1.43; 95% CI 1.17, 1.74; p < 0.001; I2 = 0%) and 20 min (RR 1.13; 95% CI 1.04, 1.22; p = 0.005; I2 = 0%) after labor analgesia. No adverse event was found with DPE analgesia. We conclude that compared with EP analgesia, DPE analgesia is beneficial for labor pain relief by shortening the time to achieve satisfactory pain control. Meanwhile, DPE analgesia is not associated with increased adverse maternal/fetal events.

SATISFACTION OF PARTURIENTS WITH EPIDURAL ANALGESIA DURING DELIVERY: ANALYSIS OF QUESTIONNAIRE AT A SINGLE HOSPITAL CENTER.

Epidural analgesia is one of the most common methods of relieving labor pain. The objective of this study was to examine the effectiveness of epidural analgesia, maternal satisfaction and relationship between the effectiveness of epidural analgesia and various factors. Data were analyzed retrospectively and collected during 2022. A total of 60 parturients participated in the study. Data were collected through a questionnaire before the parturient was discharged from the hospital. The mean assessment of pain on a 1-10 numeric rating scale before epidural analgesia was 7.7 and 3.4 after administration of epidural analgesia. The median assessment of pain before epidural analgesia was 8 (7¬¬-8), and the median assessment of pain after epidural analgesia was 3 (2-5). The average satisfaction with epidural analgesia on a 1-10 scale was 8.11, and the median satisfaction was 10 (7-10). Total of 35 (58.3%) parturients rated satisfaction with 10. Statistically significant association between the effectiveness of epidural analgesia and parity, dilution of administered levobupivacaine, fentanyl administration, and level of education was not found. Childbirth pain is significantly alleviated by the application of epidural analgesia and the satisfaction of parturients is very high.

PAIN AND ANXIETY EXPERIENCE IN THE CHOICE OF EPIDURAL ANALGESIA IN DELIVERY.

The experience of labor pain is a complex process that represents the interaction of the nociceptive stimulus within the physiologic process with a series of psychological factors. The aim of this study was to investigate the relation between the choice of epidural analgesia as a form of pain management and psychological state of woman in labor; moreover, whether the women in labor with a higher level of anxiety have a more intensive experience of pain during labor and therefore decide on epidural analgesia. Pain was evaluated by the visual analog scale, while the sensory and affective pain components were evaluated by the McGill Pain Questionnaire, and anxiety as a trait was measured with the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-form X. Women in labor with a higher level of anxiety had a significantly increased affective component of pain, but did not significantly more frequently decide on labor with epidural analgesia. The women having chosen epidural analgesia experienced more intense pain during delivery before epidural analgesia, with the sensory component of pain being less pronounced in the women in labor without epidural analgesia, while there was no difference in the affective component of pain.

Effect of Dural Puncture Epidural Technique Combined With Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus on Labor Analgesia Onset and Maintenance: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The dural puncture epidural (DPE) technique is associated with faster onset than the conventional epidural (EP) technique for labor analgesia. The programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) mode for maintaining labor analgesia allows for lower anesthetic drug consumption than the continuous epidural infusion (CEI) mode. Whether DPE technique with PIEB mode offers additional benefits for analgesia onset, local anesthetic drug consumption, and side effects versus EP or DPE techniques with CEI mode remains unclear. METHODS: Nulliparous women with a visual analog scale (VAS) pain score >50 mm and cervical dilation <5 cm were randomly assigned to receive EP + CEI, DPE + CEI, or DPE + PIEB for labor analgesia. A 25-gauge needle was used for dural puncture. Analgesia was initiated with 10 mL of 0.1% ropivacaine with 0.3 µg/mL of sufentanil and maintained with the same solution at 8 mL/h in all groups. A 5-mL patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) bolus was programmed with a 20-minute lockout. Breakthrough pain not amendable by PCEA was treated with provider boluses of 5 mL of 0.125% ropivacaine. The primary outcome was "time to adequate analgesia," defined as a VAS pain score ≤30 mm during 2 consecutive contractions, and was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves and a Cox proportional hazard model. Secondary outcomes included the VAS scores, ropivacaine consumption, sensory block level to ice, PCEA and provider boluses intervention, mode of delivery, duration of labor, Bromage scores, Apgar scores, occurrence of side effects, and maternal satisfaction with the anesthesia. RESULTS: A total of 116 women were included (38 in the EP + CEI group, 40 in the DPE + CEI group, and 38 in the DPE + PIEB group). Adequate anesthesia was achieved faster in the DPE + CEI and DPE + PIEB groups than in the EP + CEI group (hazard ratio = 1.705; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.039-2.800; P = .015; and hazard ratio = 1.774; 95% CI, 1.070-2.941; P = .012, respectively). DPE technique with PIEB mode was associated with the fewest PCEA boluses and the lowest hourly ropivacaine consumption (both P < .001). There were no differences in the duration of labor, mode of delivery, Bromage scores, newborn Apgar scores, incidence of side effects, and maternal satisfaction scores among the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The use of DPE technique for neuraxial analgesia was associated with faster onset than the use of the EP technique. DPE technique with PIEB mode achieved the greatest drug-sparing effect without increasing maternal or neonatal side effects.

The Effect of the No Pain Labor & Delivery-Global Health Initiative on Cesarean Delivery and Neonatal Outcomes in China: An Interrupted Time-Series Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The proportion of live births by cesarean delivery (CD) in China is significant, with some, particularly rural, provinces reporting up to 62.5%. The No Pain Labor & Delivery-Global Health Initiative (NPLD-GHI) was established to improve obstetric and neonatal outcomes in China, including through a reduction of CD through educational efforts. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a reduction in CD at a rural Chinese hospital occurred after NPLD-GHI. We hypothesized that a reduction in CD trend would be observed. METHODS: The NPLD-GHI program visited the Weixian Renmin Hospital, Hebei Province, China, from June 15 to 21, 2014. The educational intervention included problem-based learning, bedside teaching, simulation drill training, and multidisciplinary debriefings. An interrupted time-series analysis using segmented logistic regression models was performed on data collected between June 1, 2013 and May 31, 2015 to assess whether the level and/or trend over time in the proportion of CD births would decline after the program intervention. The primary outcome was monthly proportion of CD births. Secondary outcomes included neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admissions and extended NICU length of stay, neonatal antibiotic and intubation use, and labor epidural analgesia use. RESULTS: Following NPLD-GHI, there was a level decrease in CD with an estimated odds ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]) of 0.87 (0.78-0.98), P = .017, with odds (95% CI) of monthly CD reduction an estimated 3% (1-5; P < .001), more in the post- versus preintervention periods. For labor epidural analgesia, there was a level increase (estimated odds ratio [95% CI] of 1.76 [1.48-2.09]; P < .001) and a slope decrease (estimated odds ratio [95% CI] of 0.94 [0.92-0.97]; P < .001). NICU admissions did not have a level change (estimated odds ratio [95% CI] of 0.99 [0.87-1.12]; P = .835), but the odds (95% CI) of monthly reduction in NICU admission was estimated 9% (7-11; P < .001), greater in post- versus preintervention. Neonatal intubation level and slope changes were not statistically significant. For neonatal antibiotic administration, while the level change was not statistically significant, there was a decrease in the slope with an odds (95% CI) of monthly reduction estimated 6% (3-9; P < .001), greater post- versus preintervention. CONCLUSIONS: In a large, rural Chinese hospital, live births by CD were lower following NPLD-GHI and associated with increased use of labor epidural analgesia. We also found decreasing NICU admissions. International-based educational programs can significantly alter practices associated with maternal and neonatal outcomes.

Effect and Safety of Remifentanil Patient-Controlled Analgesia Compared with Epidural Analgesia in Labor: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

PURPOSE: The study was aimed to systematically assess the effect and safety of remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia (rPCA) versus epidural analgesia (EA) during labor. METHODS: Eligible trials were retrieved from PubMed, EMBASE, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane Library before April 2020. The primary outcomes were patient satisfaction with pain relief and average visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores during labor; the secondary outcomes were rate of spontaneous delivery, oxygen desaturation, maternal hyperthermia, and neonatal Apgar scores <7 at 1 and 5 min. RESULTS: Eleven studies involving 3,039 parturients were included. We found that parturients receiving rPCA were similarly satisfied with pain relief compared to those receiving EA (standardized mean difference: -0.19; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.57, 0.18), though had significantly higher VAS pain scores during labor (weighted mean difference: 1.41; 95% CI: 0.32, 2.50). The rate of spontaneous delivery was comparable. rPCA increased the risk of maternal oxygen desaturation (risk ratio [RR]:3.23, 95% CI: 1.98, 5.30). There was no statistical significance regarding hyperthermia (RR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.24, 1.01). No significant difference was found for neonatal Apgar scores <7 at 1 and 5 min. CONCLUSION: rPCA could be an optional alternative for pain relief to EA without worsening maternal satisfaction with pain relief, delivery modes, or neonatal morbidity. However, rPCA was associated with higher pain intensity during labor and higher incidence of maternal oxygen desaturation. The routine use of rPCA in labor must be armed with close respiratory monitoring. Continued well-designed studies are required to provide more robust evidence.

Effect of intrapartum vitamin D levels on labor pain.

AIM: Vitamin D has widespread receptor distribution in the body, and therefore it has vital roles in numerous pathophysiological conditions. It also affects pain manifestation through its functions at various stages of the pain pathways. This study aimed to investigate the effects of intrapartum vitamin D levels on pain experienced by women during the first stage of labor. METHODS: A total of 127 term-nulliparous women at the early stage of labor were included in the study. Serum 25 (OH) vitamin D levels were measured at the beginning of labor to determine intrapartum vitamin D levels. Labor pain was assessed using the Visual Analog Scale at different stages of cervical dilation (VAS0 , VAS1 , VAS2 ). Postpartum pain (VASpp ) and women's birth satisfaction score (BSS) were also evaluated during the early postpartum period. RESULTS: There was a moderate negative correlation between vitamin D and VAS0 and VAS1 (r2  = 0.4, p = 0.000; r2  = -0.570, p = 0.000, respectively), and a weak negative correlation between vitamin D and VAS2 (r2  = -0.373, p = 0.000). No significant correlation was found between vitamin D and BSS and length of labor (p = 0.127, p = 0.126, respectively). CONCLUSION: In nulliparous women with low vitamin D levels, the first stage of labor and the early postpartum period may be more painful. To facilitate management of labor pain, during the antenatal period vitamin D levels should be monitored, and in cases where the levels are deficient, vitamin D supplementation should be started.

Epidural analgesia during labour and stress markers in the newborn.

Labour and modes of delivery can influence the plasma levels of stress hormones and cytokines involved in pathophysiologic cascade, potentially damaging brain development of the newborn. This prospective observational, single-centre, case-control, non-profit study aimed to detect potential differences in foetal well-being such as stress neuroendocrine responses. Quantitative determinations of the stress markers interleukin (IL)-1ß, IL-8, and ß-endorphin were compared between the control group and the epidural analgesia group. We found higher IL1-ß levels but lower IL-8 and ß-endorphin levels in the epidural analgesia group than in the control group. No significant inter-group differences were observed for any parameters. Our findings demonstrate that epidural analgesia for pain relief during labour does not result in significant differences in blood stress response markers.IMPACT STATEMENTWhat is already known on this subject? We already know that plasma levels of stress hormones and cytokines are influenced by labour and delivery modes. This has a deep impact on the newborn in terms of brain damage, immune system deficits, and altered hypothalamic-pituitary axis responses. We also know that epidural analgesia is a widespread practice that offers pain relief to the woman in labour, but there are few studies on the potentially negative effects of epidural labour analgesia on the unborn child.What do the results of this study add? This study found no significative differences in blood stress response markers between the epidural analgesia group and the control group. Under this study circumstances we found out that epidural analgesia does not significantly influence the newborn's well-being during labour and delivery.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? These findings must be confirmed by further studies to verify whether epidural analgesia is safe for the newborn's development.