Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T03:28:52.125Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of three modes of patient-controlled epidural analgesia during labour

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 April 2005

S. M. Siddik-Sayyid ,
M. T. Aouad ,
M. I. Jalbout ,
M. I. Zalaket ,
M.-R. A. Mouallem ,
F. M. Massouh ,
L. B. Rizk ,
H. H. Maarouf  and
A. S. Baraka
S. M. Siddik-Sayyid
Affiliation:
American University of Beirut, Department of Anesthesiology, Beirut, Lebanon
M. T. Aouad
Affiliation:
American University of Beirut, Department of Anesthesiology, Beirut, Lebanon
M. I. Jalbout
Affiliation:
American University of Beirut, Department of Anesthesiology, Beirut, Lebanon
M. I. Zalaket
Affiliation:
American University of Beirut, Department of Anesthesiology, Beirut, Lebanon
M.-R. A. Mouallem
Affiliation:
American University of Beirut, Department of Anesthesiology, Beirut, Lebanon
F. M. Massouh
Affiliation:
American University of Beirut, Department of Anesthesiology, Beirut, Lebanon
L. B. Rizk
Affiliation:
American University of Beirut, Department of Anesthesiology, Beirut, Lebanon
H. H. Maarouf
Affiliation:
American University of Beirut, Department of Anesthesiology, Beirut, Lebanon
A. S. Baraka
Affiliation:
American University of Beirut, Department of Anesthesiology, Beirut, Lebanon
Get access

Extract

Summary

Background and objectives: This study compares three modes of patient-controlled epidural analgesia in parturients during labour.

Methods: Eighty-four women were randomized to one of three groups. The epidural solution used in all the three groups was 0.1% bupivacaine with fentanyl 2 μg mL−1. Patients were able to self administer a demand dose of 3 mL with a lockout interval of 6 min in Group A, 6 mL with a lockout interval of 12 min in Group B and 9 mL with lockout interval of 18 min in Group C. All patients received a background infusion at a rate of 6 mL h−1. Visual analogue pain scores, pinprick analgesia and motor block were assessed hourly by a blinded observer. The physician-administered supplementation and the cumulative dose of bupivacaine were also compared between the three groups.

Results: Pain scores, sensory level and motor block were not different among the study groups. Patients' satisfaction was rated good to excellent with no difference among groups. The cumulative dose of bupivacaine was not significantly different. However, there was a trend towards a decreased need for rescue analgesia in Group C. Within each group, the physician-administered supplementations were significantly higher during the second stage of labour than during the first stage (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: The three modes of patient-controlled epidural analgesia supplemented by a background infusion of 6 mL h−1 were equally effective for labour analgesia with a trend for decreased rescue analgesia in the group with a larger bolus dose and a longer lockout interval.

Keywords

ANAESTHESIA, obstetricalANALGESIA, obstetrical, patient-controlled, epiduralANAESTHETICS, LOCAL, bupivacaineANALGESICS, OPIOID, fentanyl
Type
Original Article
Information
European Journal of Anaesthesiology , Volume 22 , Issue 1 , January 2005 , pp. 30 - 34
Copyright
© 2005 European Society of Anaesthesiology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Gambling DR, Yu P, Cole C, McMorland GH, Palmer L. A comparative study of patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) and continuous infusion epidural analgesia (CIEA) during labor. Can J Anaesth 1988; 35: 249–254.Google Scholar
Peach MJ. Patient controlled epidural analgesia in obstetrics. Int J Obstet Anesthesia 1996; 5: 115–125.Google Scholar
Gambling DR, McMorland GH, Yu P, Laszlo C. Comparison of patient controlled epidural analgesia and intermittent top-up injections during labour. Anesth Analg 1990; 70: 256–261.Google Scholar
Purdie G, Reid G, Thorburn G, Asbury AJ. Continuous extradural analgesia: comparison of midwife top-ups, continuous infusions and patient-controlled administration. Br J Anaesth 1992; 68: 580–584.Google Scholar
Birnbach DJ. Combined spinal epidural (CSE) and other new techniques for labor analgesia. 51st ASA Annual Refresher Course Lectures and Clinical Update Program. Am Soc Anesthesiol 2000; 114: 1–7.Google Scholar
Stienstra R. Patient-controlled epidural analgesia or continuous infusion: advantages and disadvantages of different modes of delivering epidural analgesia for labour. Curr Opin Anesthesiol 2000; 13: 253–256.Google Scholar
Bernard J-M, Le Roux D, Vizquel L, et al. Patient-controlled epidural analgesia during labor: the effects of the increase in bolus and lockout interval. Anesth Analg 2000; 90: 328–332.Google Scholar
Gambling DR, Huber CJ, Berkowitz J, et al. Patient-controlled epidural analgesia in labour: varying bolus dose and lockout interval. Can J Anaesth 1993; 40: 211–217.Google Scholar
Bromage PR, Camporesi EM, Durant PR, Nielson CH. Influence of epinephrine as an adjunct to epidural morphine. Anesthesiology 1983; 58: 257–262.Google Scholar
Ferrante FM, Rosinia FA, Gordon C, Datta S. The role of continuous background infusions in patient-controlled epidural analgesia for labor and delivery. Anesth Analg 1994; 79: 80–84.Google Scholar
Ferrante FM, Lu L, Jamison SB, Datta S. Patient-controlled epidural analgesia: demand dosing. Anesth Analg 1991; 73: 547–552.Google Scholar
Capogna G, Celleno D, Lyons G, Columb M, Fusco P. Minimum local analgesic concentration of extradural bupivacaine increases with progression of labour. Br J Anaesth 1998; 80: 11–13.Google Scholar