Obstetric outcomes and maternal satisfaction in nulliparous women using patient-controlled epidural analgesia

Comparison of different delivery modalities of epidural analgesia and intravenous analgesia in labour: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

In labour, neuraxial analgesia is the standard in the provision of pain relief. However, the optimal mode of delivering epidural solution has not been determined, and some parturients may need an alternative to epidural analgesia. We sought to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis to compare continuous epidural infusion (CEI), programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB), computer-integrated CEI, computer-integrated PIEB, patient-controlled epidural bolus (PCEA), fentanyl patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), and remifentanil PCA, either alone or in combination.

METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, CINAHL, Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials that included nulliparous and/or multiparous parturients in spontaneous or induced labour. The maintenance epidural solution had to include a low concentration local anesthetic and an opioid. Specific subgroups in the obstetric population such as preeclampsia were excluded. Network meta-analysis was performed with a frequentist method, and continuous and dichotomous outcomes are presented as mean differences and odds ratios, respectively, with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Overall, 73 trials were included. For the first coprimary outcome, the need for rescue analgesia, CEI was inferior to PIEB and PIEB + PCEA was superior to PCEA alone, with a low certainty of evidence given the presence of serious limitations and imprecision. The second coprimary outcome, the maternal satisfaction, was improved by PIEB + PCEA compared with CEI + PCEA and PCEA alone, with a low quality of evidence in view of the presence of serious limitations and imprecision. Fentanyl PCA increased the requirement for rescue analgesia and decreased maternal satisfaction relative to many methods of delivering epidural solution. In terms of secondary outcomes, PIEB increased analgesic efficacy compared with CEI, and PCEA reduced local anesthetic consumption at the expense of inferior analgesia relative to CEI and PIEB. PIEB + PCEA was superior to CEI + PCEA in regard to the pain score at 2 h and 4 h, consumption of local anesthetic, incidence of lower lower limb motor blockade and the rate of spontaneous vaginal delivery. Fentanyl and remifentanil PCA did not provide the same level of analgesia as all epidural methods, resulted in increasing analgesic ineffectiveness with time spent in labour, and predisposed to a higher incidence of side effects such as nausea and/or vomiting and sedation. Remifentanil PCA was superior to fentanyl PCA for analgesia at an early time point, and it increased the incidence of oxygen desaturation relative to other strategies of delivering epidural solution.

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid PCA did not provide the same level of analgesia as epidural methods with a higher incidence of side effects. We interpret the findings of our systematic review and network meta-analysis as suggesting PIEB + PCEA to be the optimal delivery mode of epidural solution. Nevertheless, the potential differing importance of the various maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes in determining which is optimal has not, to our knowledge, been elucidated yet.

STUDY REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42021254978); registered 27 May 2021.

Predictors of incomplete maternal satisfaction with neuraxial labor analgesia: A nationwide study

PURPOSE

Neuraxial analgesia is effective and widely used during labour, but little is known about maternal satisfaction with its use. Our objectives were to assess the frequency of incomplete maternal satisfaction with neuraxial labour analgesia and its predictors.

METHODS

We extracted data from the 2016 National Perinatal Survey, a cross-sectional population-based study including all births during one week in all French maternity units. This analysis included all women who attempted vaginal delivery with neuraxial analgesia. Maternal satisfaction with analgesia was assessed by a 4-point Likert scale during a postpartum interview. Incomplete satisfaction grouped together women who were fairly, not sufficiently and not at all satisfied. We performed generalised estimating equations analyses adjusted for sociodemographic, obstetric, anaesthetic, and organisational characteristics to compare women with incomplete satisfaction to those completely satisfied.

RESULTS

Among the 8538 women included, 35.2% were incompletely satisfied with their neuraxial analgesia. The odds of incomplete satisfaction were higher among women who reported a prenatal preference not to use neuraxial analgesia but subsequently did (adjusted odds ratio 1.21; 95% confidence interval 1.05-1.39) and among those who did not use patient-controlled neuraxial analgesia (1.20; 1.07-1.34); the odds were lower among women who used combined spinal epidural analgesia (0.53; 0.28-0.99) than among those with epidural analgesia.

CONCLUSION

Incomplete maternal satisfaction with neuraxial analgesia is a frequent concern in France. Increasing the use of patient-controlled neuraxial analgesia and combined spinal-epidural analgesia, as well as consistency between prenatal preference and actual use of neuraxial analgesia may improve maternal satisfaction.

Parturient Controlled Epidural Analgesia with and without Basal Infusion of Ropivacaine and Fentanyl: A Randomized Trial

Introduction:

Parturient controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) is an established method of providing safe and effective labor analgesia.

Objective:

The aim of this single-blind, randomized controlled trial was to compare the efficacy of PCEA with or without basal infusion (BI) of ropivacaine and fentanyl for the effective management of labor pain associated with normal vaginal delivery.

Materials and Methods:

A total of 78 nulliparous parturients with vertex presentation at term and with cervical dilatation of 3–5 cm demanding for epidural analgesia (EA) were enrolled in the study. EA was initiated and maintained with ropivacaine 0.125% and fentanyl 2 μg/mL. Following an initial epidural loading volume of 8–10 mL, parturients were randomly allocated in two groups of 39 each. PCEA group received bolus of 5 mL at 200 mL/h with lockout interval of 15 min and with maximum volume of local anaesthetic was 20 mL/h and PCEA + BI group – receiving added BI rate of 5 mL/h along with same programmed parameters of PCEA pump.

Results:

No statistically significant difference was observed between the groups in terms of demographic characteristics, duration of labor, delivery methods, maternal satisfaction as well as Apgar score. Mean demand bolus in group PCEA + BI was 0.39 ± 0.59, whereas in group PCEA was 3.31 ± 0.77 (P < 0.05). Mean volume of drug used in group PCEA + BI was 25.57 ± 2.75 mL, while in group PCEA was 22.42 ± 4.56 mL (P = 0.0005). In PCEA + BI group, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score was 0.07 ± 0.35 at 60 min and 0.06 ± 0.33 at 120 min, whereas in PCEA group, VAS was 0.32 ± 0.62 at 60 min and 0.26 ± 0.50 at 120 min (P = 0.05), respectively.

Conclusion:

BI when added to PCEA, it significantly reduces breakthrough labor pain and demand boluses without prolonging labor duration but at the cost of increased requirement of drug volume when compared to PCEA only group.

[Normal childbirth: physiologic labor support and medical procedures. Guidelines of the French National Authority for Health (HAS) with the collaboration of the French College of Gynaecologists and Obstetricians (CNGOF) and the French College of Midwives (CNSF) - Mother's wellbeing and regional or systemic analgesia for labor]

INTRODUCTION

These guidelines deal with the parturient wellbeing in terms of hydration and regional and systemic pain management during labour.

METHOD

Guidelines were established based on literature analysis and experts consensus.

RESULTS

Clear liquids consumption is permitted all along labor and postpartum, without volume limitation, in patients at low risk of general anesthesia (grade B). The consumption of solid foods is not recommended during the active stage of labor (consensus agreement). It is recommended to promote on regional analgesia to prevent inhalation (grade A). Pain relief using regional analgesia is a part of normal childbirth. It is recommended to provide regional analgesia to parturient who wish these technics. Regional analgesia is the safest and most effective analgesic method for the mother (grade A) and the child (grade B). It is recommended to inform women on the analgesic technics, to respect their choice and consider the right for a parturient to change her strategy in obstetrical circumstances or in cases of untractable pain (consensus agreement). It is recommended to perform a "low-dose" regional analgesia that respects the experience of childbirth (grade A) and maintain it with a patient controlled epidural analgesia technics (grade A). There is no minimum cervical dilation to allow epidural analgesia (grade A). In cases of rapid labor or after delivery for revision, spinal or combined spinal epidural can be used (grade C). Epidural has not to be ended before birth (consensus agreement). Blood pressure and fetal heart rate must be monitored every 3minutes after induction and/or each 10mL bolus then hourly (consensus agreement). Systematic and preventive fluid loading is not needed if only due to regional analgesia (grade B). Deambulation or postures are allowed in the absence of motor block and must be traced and do not alter the distribution of the regional analgesia (grade C). The postures of childbirth do not alter regional analgesia spread (NP2). There is no effect low dose regional analgesia on the duration of obstetric labor, nor the rate of instrumental births or caesarean section (NP1). Systematic use of oxytocin due to epidural analgesia is neither useful nor recommended (AE). Regional analgesia has no side effect on the fetus or newborn (NP1). If regional analgesia is contraindicated or during the waiting time, alternatives analgesic drugs (entonox, nalbuphine and tramadol or pudendal block) can be used but their analgesic efficiency remains mediocre to moderate and they are associated with adverse maternal and especially neonatal side effects (NP2). Remifentanil, ketamine and volatile anesthetics are excluded from these recommendations.

CONCLUSION

The present guidelines were established to update wellbeing of normal parturient during normal labor: hydration is recommended and low dose patient-controlled regional (epidural and spinal) analgesia is the most effective and safest analgesic method.

Programmed intermittent epidural bolus vs. patient-controlled epidural analgesia for maintenance of labour analgesia: a two-centre, double-blind, randomised study†

The programmed intermittent epidural bolus technique has shown superiority to continuous epidural infusion techniques, with or without patient-controlled epidural analgesia for pain relief, reduced motor block and patient satisfaction. Many institutions still use patient-controlled epidural analgesia without a background infusion, and a comparative study between programmed intermittent epidural bolus and patient-controlled epidural analgesia without a background infusion has not yet been performed. We performed a randomised, two-centre, double-blind, controlled trial of these two techniques. The primary outcome was the incidence of breakthrough pain requiring a top-up dose by an anaesthetist. Secondary outcomes included: motor block; pain scores; patient satisfaction; local anaesthetic consumption; and obstetric and neonatal outcomes. We recruited 130 nulliparous women who received initial spinal analgesia, and then epidural analgesia was initiated and maintained with either programmed intermittent epidural bolus or patient-controlled epidural analgesia using ropivacaine 0.12% with sufentanil 0.75 µg·ml^-1 . The programmed intermittent epidural bolus group had a programmed bolus of 10 ml every hour, with on-demand patient-controlled epidural analgesia boluses of 5 ml with a 20 min lockout, and the patient-controlled epidural analgesia group had a 5 ml bolus with a 12 min lockout interval; the potential maximum volume per hour was the same in both groups. The patients in the programmed intermittent epidural bolus group had less frequent breakthrough pain compared with the patient-controlled epidural analgesia group, 7 (10.9%) vs. 38 (62.3%; p < 0.0001), respectively. There was a significant difference in motor block (modified Bromage score ≤ 4) frequency between groups, programmed intermittent epidural bolus group 1 (1.6%) vs. patient-controlled epidural analgesia group 8 (13.1%); p = 0.015. The programmed intermittent epidural bolus group had greater local anaesthetic consumption with fewer patient-controlled epidural analgesia boluses. Patient satisfaction scores and obstetric or neonatal outcomes were not different between groups. In conclusion, we found that a programmed intermittent epidural bolus technique using 10 ml programmed boluses and 5 ml patient-controlled epidural analgesia boluses was superior to a patient-controlled epidural analgesia technique using 5 ml boluses and no background infusion.

Intermittent epidural bolus versus continuous epidural infusions for labor analgesia: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

There are inconsistent results regarding the efficacy and safety of intermittent epidural bolus (IPB) versus continuous epidural infusions (CPI) for labor analgesia. This study used a meta-analytic approach to assess the safety and treatment efficacy of IPB versus CPI for labor analgesia based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Four electronic databases were used to identify eligible RCTs. Pooled effect estimates at 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Twenty-two RCTs with 2,573 parturients were selected for final analysis. The findings revealed no significant differences between IPB and CPI for the incidences of cesarean and instrumental delivery. IPB was shown to be associated with shorter total duration of labor [weighted mean difference (WMD): −21.46; 95% CI: −25.07 to −17.85; P < 0.001], duration of the first of stage of labor (WMD: −13.41; 95% CI: −21.01 to −5.81; P = 0.001), and duration of the second stage of labor (WMD: −4.98; 95% CI: −9.32 to −0.63; P = 0.025). Furthermore, IPB significantly reduced the incidences of required anesthetic interventions compared with CPI [relative risk (RR): 0.61; 95% CI: 0.39–0.95; P = 0.030], whereas there was no significant difference between IPB and CPI for the time required in the first anesthetic intervention (WMD: 7.73; 95% CI: −33.68–49.15; P = 0.714). The local anesthetic IPB (bupivacaine equivalents) was associated with lower milligrams per hour of local anesthetic (WMD: −0.89; 95% CI: −1.41 to −0.36; P = 0.001) and better maternal satisfaction (WMD: 8.76; 95% CI: 4.18–13.35; P < 0.001). There were no significant differences between IPB and CPI for the risk of adverse events. This study found that parturients with IPB have short total duration of labor and duration of the first and second stage of labor, reduced requirements for additional anesthetic interventions, and improved maternal satisfaction.

Neuraxial labor analgesia: a literature review

The use of analgesia techniques for labor has become increasingly frequent, with neuraxial techniques being the most commonly used and most effective. Labor pain entails a number of physiological consequences that may be negative for the mother and fetus, and therefore must be treated. This literature review was performed through a search in the PubMed database, from July to November 2016, and included articles in English or Portuguese, published between 2011 and 2016 or anteriorly, if relevant to the topic. The techniques were divided into the following topics: induction (epidural, combined epidural-spinal, continuous spinal, and epidural with dural puncture) and maintenance of analgesia (continuous epidural infusion, patient-controlled epidural analgesia, and intermittent epidural bolus). Epidural analgesia does not alter the incidence of cesarean sections or fetal prognosis, and maternal request is a sufficient indication for its initiation. The combined technique has the advantage of a faster onset of analgesia; however, patients are subject to a higher incidence of pruritus resulting from the intrathecal administration of opioids. Patient-controlled analgesia seems to be an excellent technique, reducing the consumption of local anesthetics, the number of anesthesiologist interventions, and increasing maternal satisfaction.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Comparing Programmed Intermittent Bolus and Continuous Infusion as the Background Infusion for Parturient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia

The programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) technique offers multiple benefits over continuous epidural infusion (CEI), but controversy still exists when it is used in conjunction with a parturient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) regimen. A systematic review and meta-analysis was thus conducted using the Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL and Web of Science databases with the aim of identifying those randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that performed a comparison between PIEB and CEI in healthy parturients using a PCEA regimen with regard to the duration of labor, labor pain, anesthesia interventions, maternal satisfaction and main side effects. The data were analyzed using a random-effects model. Eleven eligible trials were included, in which 717 participants were allocated to the PIEB + PCEA group and 650 patients were allocated to the CEI + PCEA group. The rate of instrumental delivery, incidence of breakthrough pain, PCEA usage rates and local anesthetic usage were significantly reduced, the labor duration was statistically shorter, and the maternal satisfaction score was significantly improved in the PIEB + PCEA group compared with that in the CEI + PCEA group. There were no differences in the side effects between the two groups. The results of the present study suggest that the PIEB technique in conjunction with the PCEA regimen was more advantageous than CEI + PCEA, but additional studies should be conducted to consistently demonstrate an improvement in the maternal and fetal obstetric outcomes.

[Neuraxial labor analgesia: a literature review]

The use of analgesia techniques for labor has become increasingly frequent, with neuraxial techniques being the most commonly used and most effective. Labor pain entails a number of physiological consequences that may be negative for the mother and fetus, and therefore must be treated. This literature review was performed through a search in the PubMed database, from July to November 2016, and included articles in English or Portuguese, published between 2011 and 2016 or anteriorly, if relevant to the topic. The techniques were divided into the following topics: induction (epidural, combined epidural-spinal, continuous spinal, and epidural with dural puncture) and maintenance of analgesia (continuous epidural infusion, patient-controlled epidural analgesia, and intermittent epidural bolus). Epidural analgesia does not alter the incidence of cesarean sections or fetal prognosis, and maternal request is a sufficient indication for its initiation. The combined technique has the advantage of a faster onset of analgesia; however, patients are subject to a higher incidence of pruritus resulting from the intrathecal administration of opioids. Patient-controlled analgesia seems to be an excellent technique, reducing the consumption of local anesthetics, the number of anesthesiologist interventions, and increasing maternal satisfaction.

[Recent standards in management of obstetric anesthesia]

The following article contains information not only for the clinical working anaesthesiologist, but also for other specialists involved in obstetric affairs. Besides a synopsis of a German translation of the current "Practice Guidelines for Obstetric Anaesthesia 2016" [1], written by the American Society of Anesthesiologists, the authors provide personal information regarding major topics of obstetric anaesthesia including pre-anaesthesia patient evaluation, equipment and staff at the delivery room, use of general anaesthesia, peridural analgesia, spinal anaesthesia, combined spinal-epidural anaesthesia, single shot spinal anaesthesia, and programmed intermittent epidural bolus.

Practice Guidelines for Obstetric Anesthesia

The American Society of Anesthesiologists Committee on Standards and Practice Parameters and the Task Force on Obstetric Anesthesia and the Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology present an updated report of the Practice Guidelines for Obstetric Anesthesia.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Effects of Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia on Uterine Electromyography During Spontaneous Onset of Labor in Term Nulliparous Women

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) on uterine electromyography (EMG) activity in term pregnant women during labor.

METHODS

Nulliparous pregnant women in spontaneous term labor (N = 30) were enrolled (PCEA group, n = 20 and control group, n = 10). Five time periods (30 minutes each) were defined for noninvasive abdominal recordings and analysis of uterine EMG activity, that is, period I: before PCEA treatment with 2-cm cervical dilation; periods II to IV: each period successively at 30, 60, and 120 minutes after PCEA; and period V: second stage of labor with cervix at 10 cm dilation. Control patients without PCEA were monitored during the same times. The number of bursts/30 min, power density spectrum peak frequency, mean amplitude, and duration of uterine EMG bursts were measured to assess uterine EMG activity. Maternal, fetal, and labor characteristics were also recorded. Data were analyzed by analysis of variance followed by other tests.

RESULTS

Electromyography parameters are significantly lower (P < .001) after PCEA (periods II to IV) compared to controls but similar between groups by period V (P > .05). Also, patients with PCEA have a slower rate of cervical dilation (P < .003, period IV only) and longer labor in both stage 1 and stage 2 (P < .05). All patients have similar (P > .05) positive labor outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-controlled epidural analgesia initially suppresses uterine EMG and slows cervical dilation thereby prolonging labor. However, the EMG activity recovers with labor progress with no effects on delivery outcomes.

[Pregnancy and delivery satisfaction of 424 patients in Perinatal Health Network « Sécurité Naissance » of Pays-de-la-Loire area]

BACKGROUND

One method of evaluating a perinatal policy measuring user satisfaction is an important issue. The objective of the study was to measure satisfaction with the monitoring of pregnancy, childbirth and maternity stay.

METHODS

Each volunteer maternity received a list of all births during one week in March-April 2008. The first mailing of questionnaires was conducted by post with stamped envelopes for the reply, after 2months in May and June 2008. A second reminder was made in July 2008. Responses to questions were coded using a Likert scale with four degrees with "very satisfied", "satisfied," "not very satisfied" and "not satisfied" with a quote by 4 to 1. The results are presented with the proportions of satisfied women, with radar diagrams. Transformation of responses with scores of 20 was established.

RESULTS

In total, 424 responses were obtained in 22 maternities (/24), on 524 questionnaires sent (response rate 80.9 %). A comparison of mothers who responded to those who did not respond showed an over-representation of senior and middle managers and department. The average response time from birth was ten weeks±1 (8-26). The early prenatal care (known as the 4th month) was ignored (the word) by 58 % of women, but satisfying for those who have had while preparing for the birth, information on ultrasounds, tests on blood testing were satisfactory. A total of 13.2 % of women were hospitalized, and 94.9 % of cases, the information was obtained with 96.5 % satisfaction for the explanations. Mothers were met for the monitoring of pregnancy to 95.4 %. At delivery, the reception was well received with 94.7 % of satisfaction, like attention paid to patients with 93.5 % satisfied. The satisfaction score for delivery in general (with or without cesarean) was 16.5±4.0 (out of 20) with 92.5 % satisfied. The score for the cesarean section was 16.3 versus 16.6 for the low channels (not significant [NS]) in the case of anesthesia of 16.5 versus 16.7 (NS) in case of episiotomy of 15.9 versus 16.9 (P<0.05). The length of postpartum stay was found too short in case of 4.8 % (4.7 days), correct in 78.6 % (4.8 days), too long in 15.9 % (4.8 days). The satisfaction score for delivery in general (with or without cesarean) was 16.5 out of 20 with 92.5 % of satisfied. Also, 73.1 % of mothers tended to agree about the useful information for baby; 77.8 % thought that breastfeeding went well. The total score for pregnancy and childbirth is averaging 16.1, with 95.7 % of satisfied. The dissatisfying factors for 17 women have been linked in univariate to a department, the choice of maternity proximity and the existence of an episiotomy. Multivariate analysis was not significant criteria of discontent.

CONCLUSION

Users respond to this type of investigation and seem satisfied with the care provided, in accordance with published data. The analysis of satisfaction and sources of dissatisfaction can improve treatments. The limits of the notion of satisfaction are analyzed.