Using part of the initial analgesic dose as the epidural test dose did not delay the onset of labor analgesia: a randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Epidural test dose for labor analgesia is controversial and varies widely in clinical practice. It is currently unclear whether using a portion of the initial dose for analgesia as the test dose delays the onset time of analgesia, compared to the traditional test dose. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-six parturients who chose epidural analgesia during labor were randomly assigned to two groups. The first dose in group L was 3 ml 1.5% lidocaine, and in the RF group was 10 ml 0.1% ropivacaine combined with 2 µg/ml fentanyl. After 3 min of observation, both groups received 8 ml 0.1% ropivacaine combined with 2 µg/ml fentanyl. The onset time of analgesia, motor and sensory blockade level, numerical pain rating scale, patient satisfaction score, and side effects were recorded. RESULTS: The onset time of analgesia in group RF was similar to that in group L (group RF vs group L, 7.0 [5.0-9.0] minutes vs 8.0 [5.0-11.0] minutes, p = 0.197). The incidence of foot numbness (group RF vs group L, 34.9% vs 57.1%, p = 0.020) and foot warming (group RF vs group L, 15.9% vs 47.6%, p < 0.001) in group RF was significantly lower than that in group L. There was no difference between the two groups on other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with 1.5% lidocaine 3 ml, 0.1% ropivacaine 10 ml combined with 2 µg/ml fentanyl as an epidural test dose did not delay the onset of labor analgesia, and the side effects were slightly reduced. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR2100043071).

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.

Efficacy and safety of nalbuphine for epidural labor analgesia at high altitude: An observational study.

Xining is located at the eastern edge of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, with an average altitude of >7000 feet (>2000 m). Nalbuphine is a kappa-opioid receptor agonist that can provide analgesia with fewer side effects than other opioid analgesics. This study aimed to evaluate pain control, side effects, and neonatal outcomes from combining nalbuphine with sufentanil and ropivacaine in 600 women during epidural anesthesia while giving birth at a high altitude in Xining, China. A total of 600 parturients receiving epidural labor analgesia were randomly divided into 2 groups, each group 300 parturients. The nalbuphine group received nalbuphine, sufentanil, and ropivacain, the control group only received sufentanil and ropivacain. The analgesic effect was evaluated through the Visual Analogue Scale scores. Neonatal outcomes were mainly evaluated through the Apgar Scores. Compared to the control group, the nalbuphine group showed lower Visual Analogue Scale scores at all time points after analgesia (P < .05). In comparison with the control group, parturients in the nalbuphine group showed lower incidence rates of fever at delivery, 24-hour postpartum bleeding, and pruritus (P < .05). However, between the 2 groups, there were no statistically significant differences in the remaining maternal and infant outcomes and neonatal outcomes (P > .05). Moreover, no adverse effects on neonatal outcomes were observed. The findings from this study support findings from previous studies that nalbuphine provided safe epidural analgesia without significant side effects for the mother and infant, and showed both safety and efficacy when used during labor at high altitude.

Association Between Intrapartum Nitrous Oxide for Labor Analgesia and Short-Term Neonatal Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between intrapartum nitrous oxide use and adverse short-term neonatal outcomes. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of individuals with singleton gestations at 35 or more weeks who attempted labor and delivered at an academic hospital between June 1, 2015, and February 28, 2020. Data were extracted from the electronic medical record using billing and diagnostic codes. Patients were classified based on whether they received no intrapartum analgesia or received nitrous oxide only. Those who received other analgesia types were excluded. The primary outcome was neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission. Secondary outcomes included Apgar score less than 7 at 1 minute and 5 minutes, respiratory composite outcome (including meconium aspiration syndrome, neonatal bronchopulmonary disorders, neonatal transient tachypnea, and other neonatal respiratory distress that required NICU admission), hypoglycemia, and hyperbilirubinemia. Univariable and multivariable analyses were used to estimate the association between nitrous oxide exposure intrapartum and the selected outcomes. RESULTS: Of 6,047 included, 4,153 (68.7%) received no analgesia, and 1,894 (31.3%) received nitrous oxide only. In comparison with individuals who received no analgesia, those who received nitrous oxide were more likely to be nulliparous, be of Black racial identity, have noncommercial insurance, and be less likely to deliver by intrapartum cesarean. The reception of nitrous oxide, compared with the reception of no analgesia, was associated with a lower likelihood of NICU admission (6.4% vs 8.1%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.77, 95% CI, 0.62-0.96) and an increased likelihood of neonatal hyperbilirubinemia (aOR 1.23, 95% CI, 1.08-1.41). Inhaled nitrous oxide exposure, in comparison with the reception of no analgesia, was not associated with the other secondary outcomes, including Apgar score less than 7 at 1 minute (odds ratio [OR] 0.74, 95% CI, 0.50-1.10) or 5 minutes (OR 0.91, 95% CI, 0.32-2.60), respiratory composite outcome (OR 0.91, 95% CI, 0.70-1.17), and hypoglycemia (OR 0.82, 95% CI, 0.64-1.05). CONCLUSION: In this single-center retrospective cohort of low-risk patients, intrapartum inhaled nitrous oxide, compared with the reception of no analgesia, was associated with a decreased risk for NICU admission but with an increased risk for hyperbilirubinemia; other outcomes did not differ. These findings may be used to counsel patients when considering nitrous oxide for labor analgesia.

Labour pain relief practice by maternal health care providers at a tertiary facility in Kenya: An institution-based descriptive survey.

BACKGROUND: Although pain relief is a crucial component of modern obstetric care, it remains a poorly established service in sub-Saharan countries such as Kenya. Maternal health care providers have an extensive role to play in meeting the analgesic needs of women during childbirth. This study sought to examine the practice of labour pain relief among Kenyan maternal health care providers. METHODS: This was an institution-based, cross-sectional, descriptive survey. The study included midwives, obstetricians, and anaesthesiologists (n = 120) working at the second-largest tertiary facility in Kenya. A structured, self-administered questionnaire was used. The labour pain relief practice, knowledge, attitude, and perceived barriers to labour pain management were described. RESULTS: One hundred and seventeen respondents participated in the study representing a response rate of 97.5%. More than half of maternal health care providers routinely provided the service of labour pain relief (61.5%). Sixty-four (88.9%) respondents reported providing pharmacological and non-pharmacological methods, while 11.1% provided only pharmacological ones. The most common pharmacological method prescribed was non-opioids (12.8%). The most preferred non-pharmacological method of pain management was touch and massage (93.8%). Regional analgesia was provided by 3.4% of the respondents. More than half of the respondents (53%) had poor knowledge of labour pain relief methods. Almost all (94%) of the respondents had a positive attitude towards providing labour pain relief. Non-availability of drugs and equipment (58.1%), lack of clear protocols and guidelines (56.4%), and absence of adequate skilled personnel (55.6%) were reported as the health system factors that hinder the provision of labour analgesia. CONCLUSIONS: More than half of maternal health care providers routinely relieve labour pain. Epidural analgesia is still relatively underutilized. There is a need to develop institutional labour pain management protocols to meet the analgesic needs of women during childbirth.

Is epidural analgesia non-inferior to intrathecal fentanyl as initiation for neuraxial analgesia in early non-spontaneous labour?

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Intrathecal fentanyl, using the combined spinal-epidural (CSE) technique, provides rapid analgesia during early labour. Because of the technique's more complex and invasive nature, as its replacement we assessed the use of epidural analgesia in primiparous parturients with induced labour. The study was registered at www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov (NCT04645823). The aim was to compare the efficacy, duration of analgesia and maternal satisfaction. The primary outcome was the difference in pain visual analogue scale (VAS) between the interventions at 20 min after the analgesia administration. METHODS: Sixty volunteering parturients were randomly allocated in 1:1 ratio to receive either intrathecal fentanyl 20 µg or epidural analgesia (fentanyl 100 µg and lidocaine 80 mg). Contraction pain and maternal satisfaction were assessed by 0-100 mm VAS for 30 min, respectively. Foetal heart rate abnormalities, the time to first epidural dose and the incidence of pruritus were recorded. Non-inferiority margin for mean (95% CI) VAS after epidural analgesia was set at 20 mm above the VAS value for intrathecal fentanyl at 20 min. RESULTS: The contraction pain VAS fell from (median [interquartile range, IQR]) 82 (14) to 13 (20) mm and 76 (17) to 12 (27) mm in 20 min following the intrathecal fentanyl and epidural analgesia, respectively. The absolute mean difference (epidural-intrathecal fentanyl) in the VAS values was 3.3(-0.06 to 6.66) mm indicating non-inferiority. The median time to reach VAS <30 mm was 10 min in both groups. The duration until request for supplemental analgesia was 82(69-95) and 91(75-106) min after intrathecal fentanyl and epidural analgesia, respectively. The difference for the duration (epidural-intrathecal fentanyl) was 9 (6-12) min and for satisfaction-VAS 0.3 (-3.0 to 3.7) mm. There were no differences between the groups in the incidence of foetal heart rate abnormalities, while pruritus was more common after intrathecal fentanyl. CONCLUSION: After 20 min, epidural analgesia by lidocaine and fentanyl was within the non-inferior threshold compared with intrathecal fentanyl in efficacy. The duration of action was not shorter than that of intrathecal fentanyl and maternal satisfaction was also similar.

Structural Racism and Use of Labor Neuraxial Analgesia Among Non-Hispanic Black Birthing People.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between structural racism and labor neuraxial analgesia use. METHODS: This cross-sectional study analyzed 2017 U.S. natality data for non-Hispanic Black and White birthing people. The exposure was a multidimensional structural racism index measured in the county of the delivery hospital. It was calculated as the mean of three Black-White inequity ratios (ratios for lower education, unemployment, and incarceration in jails) and categorized into terciles, with the third tercile corresponding to high structural racism. The outcome was the labor neuraxial analgesia rate. Adjusted odds ratios and 95% CIs of neuraxial analgesia associated with terciles of the index were estimated with multivariate logistic regression models. Black and White people were compared with the use of an interaction term between race and ethnicity and the racism index. RESULTS: Of the 1,740,716 birth certificates analyzed, 396,303 (22.8%) were for Black people. The labor neuraxial analgesia rate was 77.2% for Black people in the first tercile of the racism index, 74.7% in the second tercile, and 72.4% in the third tercile. For White people, the rates were 80.4%, 78.2%, and 78.2%, respectively. For Black people, compared with the first tercile of the racism index, the second tercile was associated with 18.4% (95% CI, 16.9-19.9%) decreased adjusted odds of receiving neuraxial analgesia and the third tercile with 28.3% (95% CI, 26.9-29.6%) decreased adjusted odds. For White people, the decreases were 13.4% (95% CI, 12.5-14.4%) in the second tercile and 15.6% (95% CI, 14.7-16.5%) in the third tercile. A significant difference in the odds of neuraxial analgesia was observed between Black and White people for the second and third terciles. CONCLUSION: A multidimensional index of structural racism is associated with significantly reduced odds of receiving labor neuraxial analgesia among Black people and, to a lesser extent, White people.

Long-term effects of neuraxial analgesia.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review article explores the potential longer-term implications of neuraxial analgesia in labour for both the mother and her child. RECENT FINDINGS: Neuraxial techniques for labour analgesia are well tolerated and effective, and long-term adverse sequelae are rare. Labour epidural analgesia is not independently associated with long-term headache, backache, postnatal depression or anal sphincter injury, and evidence supports that epidurals may offer protection against severe maternal morbidity, particularly in women at a higher risk of complications. However, there is an increasing awareness that postdural puncture headache may be associated with chronic headache, back pain and postnatal depression, emphasizing the need for adequate follow-up until symptoms resolve.For the neonate, a growing body of evidence refutes any association between epidural analgesia in labour and the later development of autism spectrum disorder. The clinical significance of epidural related maternal fever remains uncertain and is a research priority. SUMMARY: Women should continue to access the significant benefits of neuraxial analgesia in labour without undue concern about adverse sequelae for themselves or their offspring. Measures to prevent, appropriately manage and adequately follow-up women who have suffered complications of neuraxial analgesia, such as postdural puncture headache, are good practice and can mitigate the development of long-term sequelae.

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.

Técnicas complementarias de relajación y analgesia no farmacológicas durante el parto: revisión sistemática / Complementary techniques of relaxation and non-pharmacological analgesia during childbirth: systematic review

Introducción: Existe la necesidad de proporcionar estrategias de analgesia que alienten y promuevan la participación de la mujer en la toma de decisiones en el momento del parto y las técnicas de relajación podrían ser un método analgésico no far-macológico complementario y/o alternativo a la anestesia epidural ampliamente utilizado. en la estándar atención del trabajo de parto. Objetivo: El objetivode este estudio es analizar los efectos obstétricos de las técnicas de relajación en el manejo del dolor durante el parto. Método: Se realiza una revisión sistemática con lectura crítica de los estudios incluidos. La búsqueda de estudios se realizó en las principales bases de datos MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Cuiden, LILACS y SciELO. Se incluyen estudios publicados en inglés o español entre 2015 y febrero de 2021. Se incluyen una vez estudios, seis de los cuales son revisados sistemáticamente y cinco son ensayos clínicos aleatorios. Las intervenciones analizadas fueron técnicas de relajación como hipnosis, inyección intradérmica de agua estéril, inmersión en agua tibia, masaje, acu-puntura, musicoterapia, aromaterapia, apoyo continuo y prácticas mente-cuerpo como respiración relajante, yoga y meditación, entre otras. Conclusión: La principal conclusión de este estudio es que las técnicas de relajación pueden disminuir el nivel de dolor durante el trabajo, aunque la evidencia científica actual es limitada y la calidad metodológica varía de baja a moderada. Se necesitan más ensayos controlados aleatorios para apoyar esta investigación (AU)

Introduction:There is a need to provide analgesia strategies that encourage and promote women's participation in decision-making at the time of delivery and relaxation techniques could be a complementary and/or alternative non-pharmacological analgesic method to the widely used epidural anaesthesia in standard labour care. Objective: Theobjective of this study is to analyze the obstetric effects of relaxation techniques on pain management during labour. Method: A systematic review is performed with critical reading of included studies. The search for studies was carried out in the main databases MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Cuiden, LILACS and SciELO. Studies published in English or Spanish between 2015 and February 2021 were included. Eleven studies were included, six of which are systematic reviews and five are randomised clinical trials. The interventions analysed were relaxation techniques such as hypnosis, intradermal injection of sterile water, warm water immersion, massage, acupuncture, music therapy, aromatherapy, continuous support and mind-body practices like relaxing breathing, yoga and meditation, among others. Conclusion: The main conclusion of this study is that relaxation techniques may decrease the level of pain during labour, although the current scientific evidence is limited and the methodological quality varies from low to moderate. More randomised controlled trials are needed to support this research (AU)

Effect of esketamine on postpartum depression after labor analgesia and potential mechanisms: a randomized, double-blinded controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effect of esketamine combined with ropivacaine hydrochloride on the occurrence of postpartum depression (PPD) after labor analgesia under epidural analgesia pump and explore the possible mechanisms. METHODS: A total of 120 women aged 24 to 36 years old who underwent labor analgesia by epidural analgesia pump, with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status II were enrolled. According to the formula of epidural analgesia pump, all participants were randomly divided into two groups: esketamine group (Group E) and control group (Group C). Epidural anaesthesia were operated in all women between L2 and L3 after cervical dilation up to 2 ~ 3 cm. After successful puncture, the epidural catheter was placed 3.5 cm toward the head and 1% lidocaine was injected for 3 ml. The epidural analgesia pump was connected. Esketamine (0.2 mg/kg) combined with 0.75% ropivacaine hydrochloride (20 ml) were diluted by normal saline up to 100 ml in Group E, when only the equal dose of ropivacaine hydrochloride was used in Group C. The visual analogue scale (VAS) before analgesia (T1), 5 (T2), 10 (T3) and 20 (T4) minutes after analgesia were measured. The duration of the first and second stage of labor, the Apgar score of fetus at delivery, postpartum hemorrhage, consumption of esketamine and ropivacaine were recorded. The incidence of PPD was recorded at 1 week and 6 weeks after delivering. The occurrence of side effects such as nausea and vomiting, dizziness, and nightmares were also recorded for 48 h after delivering. The levels of leptin, norepinephrine(NE), and epinephrine(E) in the peripheral venous blood were measured before labor analgesia and at 24 h, 1 week, and 6 weeks after delivering. RESULTS: Compared with Group C, the VAS score at T2, T3 and T4 were significantly lower in Group E (P < 0.01). Compared with Group C, the incidence of PPD was significantly lower at 1 week and 6 weeks after delivering in Group E (P < 0.01). Compared with Group C, the levels of leptin were significantly higher at 24 h and 1 week after delivering in Group E (P < 0.01), while NE and E (P < 0.01) were lower at the same time (P < 0.01). There were no significant difference of the duration of the first and second stage of labor, the Apgar score of fetus at delivery, postpartum hemorrhage, consumption of ropivacaine and the side effects for 48 h after delivering between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Esketamine combined with ropivacaine hydrochloride used in labor analgesia can significantly reduce the incidence of postpartum depression after delivering without increasing related side effects, which may be related to the regulation of leptin, norepinephrine, and epinephrine in the serum. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry on 30/05/2022 (CTRI registration number-ChiCTR2200060387). URL of registry: https://www.chictr.org.cn/bin/home .

Influence of different volumes and frequency of programmed intermittent epidural bolus in labor on maternal and neonatal outcomes: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: In labor, programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) can be defined as the bolus administration of epidural solution at scheduled time intervals. Compared to continuous epidural infusion (CEI) with or without patient controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA), PIEB has been associated with decreased pain scores and need for rescue analgesia and increased maternal satisfaction. The optimal volume and dosing interval of PIEB, however, has still not been determined. DESIGN: Systematic review and network meta-analysis registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022362708). SETTINGS: Labor. PATIENTS: Pregnant patients. INTERVENTIONS: Central, CINAHL, Global Health, Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials that examined pregnant patients in labor who received CEI or PIEB with or without a PCEA component. Network meta-analysis was performed with a frequentist method, facilitating the indirect comparison of PIEB with different volumes and dosing intervals through the common comparator of CEI and substituting or supplementing direct comparisons with these indirect ones. Continuous and dichotomous outcomes were presented as mean differences and odds ratios, respectively, with 95% confidence intervals. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool. MAIN RESULTS: Overall, 30 trials were included. For the first primary endpoint, need for rescue analgesia, PIEB delivered at a volume of 4 ml and frequency of 45 min (4/45) was inferior to PIEB 8/45 (OR 3.55; 95% CI 1.12-11.33), PIEB 10/60 was superior to PIEB 2.5/15 (OR 0.36; 95% CI 0.16-0.82), PIEB 4/45 (OR 0.14; 95% CI 0.03-0.71) and PIEB 5/60 (OR 0.23; 95% CI 0.08-0.70), and PIEB 5/30 was not inferior to PIEB 10/60 (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.31-1.19). For the second primary endpoint, maternal satisfaction, no differences were present between the various PIEB regimens. The quality of evidence for these multiple primary endpoints was low owing to the presence of serious limitations and imprecision. Importantly, PIEB 5/30 decreased the pain score at 4 h compared to PIEB 2.5/15 (MD 2.45; 95% CI 0.13-4.76), PIEB 5/60 (MD -2.28; 95% CI -4.18--0.38) and PIEB 10/60 (MD 1.73; 95% CI 0.31-3.16). Mean ranking of interventions demonstrated PIEB 10/60 followed by PIEB 5/30 to be best placed to reduce the cumulative dose of local anesthetic, and this resulted in an improved incidence of lower limb motor blockade for PIEB 10/60 in comparison to CEI (OR 0.30; 95% CI 0.14-0.67). No differences in neonatal outcomes were found. Some concerns were present for the risk of bias in two thirds of trials and the risk of bias was shown to be high in the remaining one third of trials. CONCLUSIONS: Future research should focus on PIEB 5/30 and PIEB 10/60 and how the method of analgesia initiation, nature and concentration of local anesthetic, design of epidural catheter and rate of administration might influence outcomes related to the mother and neonate.

Association of pain catastrophizing with labor pain and analgesia consumption in obstetrical patients.

INTRODUCTION: Pain catastrophizing is an exaggerated negative orientation to painful stimuli which in obstetric patients is associated with fear of overwhelming labor pain and negative pain-related outcomes. This study aimed to quantitatively examine the association of pain catastrophizing with maternal labor pain outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational study of women admitted for a vaginal trial of labor. Subjects completed the 13-item Pain Catastrophizing scale (PCS) questionnaire (scored 0 to 52, higher scores representing greater catastrophizing). Pain was assessed at baseline and at request for neuraxial labor analgesia. Labor and postpartum pain intensity was assessed as the average area under the pain intensity by time curve. Pain at request for analgesia, labor pain, postpartum pain, analgesic consumption, and quality of recovery was compared between high (PCS ≥ 17) and low catastrophizing groups. RESULTS: Data from 138/157 (88%) subjects were included in the analysis. Median (IQR) pain scores at request for analgesia were 9 (8,10) and 8 (6,9), a difference of 1 (95% CI 0 to 2.5, P = 0.008) in high-catastrophizing and in low-catastrophizing groups, respectively. Adjusted pain during labor, postpartum pain and opioid analgesic use were not significantly different. High-catastrophizers reported less comfort, ability to mobilize and less control during hospitalization. Post-discharge there were no differences in pain or analgesic use. CONCLUSION: We did not observe greater labor or post-delivery pain or increased analgesic use in high-catastrophizing parturients. High catastrophizers reported greater pain when requesting analgesia, which is consistent with the role of catastrophizing in intensifying the experience of pain.

Parturients feel capable of giving informed consent for epidural analgesia: A qualitative and quantitative analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The patient's right to autonomy confirmed by informed consent is a cornerstone in modern medicine. Epidural analgesia is increasingly popular in obstetric analgesia, but physicians disagree whether labour pain impairs parturient decision-making. We investigated the fraction of parturients feeling capable of giving informed consent including their knowledge of risks. METHODS: Bedside survey postpartum women at the Herlev Hospital, Denmark. The inclusion criteria were recipient of epidural analgesia during labour. A power calculation based on the recognition of genuine and false side effects required the inclusion of 50 participants. RESULTS: Forty out of fifty (80%) of the participants felt they could make a judicious consent during labour and 46 out of 50 (92%) felt they knew enough about epidural analgesia to give consent to the procedure again if necessary. Participants spontaneously reported a median of two risks associated with epidural analgesia. Additionally, when prompted with a cued list of true and false risks from epidural analgesia, the participants reported on average 5.1 genuine risks compared with 0.4 made-up risks. The difference (4.7) suggests the included women could discern genuine risks from made-up risks. DISCUSSION: The majority of participants reported the capacity to give informed consent. Our quantitative results show the participants could clearly distinguish genuine risks of epidural labour analgesia from made-up risks. Our qualitative data likewise suggest that participants understood the information and consequently their informed consent was genuine. Accordingly, parturients are able to give informed consent. This is supported by parturients' ability to identify risks from epidural labour analgesia.

Application of Dexmedetomidine in Epidural Labor Analgesia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVES: To summarize and appraise the use of dexmedetomidine in epidural labor analgesia, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: We conducted the literature search about the RCTs of epidural labor analgesia with or without dexmedetomidine from inception until November 1, 2022, in the following databases: PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase. The primary outcome was visual analog scale (VAS) within 2 hours after epidural intubation. The secondary outcomes included the duration of the first and second labor stages, Apgar score, umbilical blood pH, dosage of analgesics, and side effects. RESULTS: Eight RCTs including 846 parturients were included. The VAS score of the dexmedetomidine group was significantly lower than that of the control group at the time of 15 minutes (mean difference [MD] -1.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.23, -0.59), 30 minutes (MD -1.02, 95% CI -1.70, -0.33), 60 minutes (MD -0.90, 95% CI -1.36, -0.44), and 90 minutes (MD -0.70, 95% CI -1.16, -0.23). The incidence of pruritus in the dexmedetomidine group was lower than that of the control group （MD 0.28, 95% CI 0.11, 0.74), but the incidence of maternal bradycardia was higher (MD 6.41, 95% CI 1.64, 25.04). There were no significant difference in other outcomes. DISCUSSION: Dexmedetomidine combined with local anesthetic for epidural labor analgesia can improve the VAS score of parturients. Except for the increased incidence of maternal bradycardia, it seems to be safe for the parturients and fetuses.

Radiographical presentations of inadvertent subdural placement of an epidural catheter for successful labor analgesia: A case report.

RATIONALE: Lumbar epidural analgesia is the gold standard for labor pain control. However, misplacement of epidural catheters into the subdural space may inadvertently happen. Unrecognized subdural administration of local anesthetics could result in serious consequences, including high spinal and brainstem blocks. This case report describes a case where subdural epidural catheter placement was recognized early but labor pain was adequately managed by dosage titration of subdural analgesia. PATIENT CONCERNS: This case report describes a 29-year-old primiparous pregnant woman who was admitted to our obstetric unit for labor induction at the gestational age of 38 weeks. An epidural catheter was inserted via the L2-3 intervertebral space using the standard loss of resistance to air technique. DIAGNOSES: The parturient experienced weakness in the lower extremities and numbness in the upper extremities within 15 minutes after administration of 5 mL of 2% v/v lidocaine as a loading dose and systolic blood pressure also dropped by 25%. INTERVENTIONS: The dose regimen (a mixture of 0.1% ropivacaine and 4 µg/mL fentanyl) for patient-controlled analgesia was given with bolus doses of 0.1 mL per demand and lockout intervals of 20 minutes. The analgesic effects were adequately maintained below the T8 dermatome for more than 12 hours without hypotensive episodes or obvious signs of neurological deficits. Computed tomographic myelography was performed by instillation of a nonionic iodinated contrast medium via the epidural catheter on postpartum day 2 for imaging confirmation of catheter placement in the extradural space. LESSONS: Early recognition that epidural catheters for neuraxial analgesia have been inserted into the subdural space is important for the prevention of high spinal blocks. Subdural analgesia could still be achieved by careful clinical assessment and titration of low analgesic doses. This report also presents important and clear serial computed tomographic images of catheter placement in the thoracic-lumbar subdural spaces and the extent of volume spread in the subdural space following administration of contrast medium.