A case series of vital signs-controlled, patient-assisted intravenous analgesia (VPIA) using remifentanil for labour and delivery

Use of wireless respiratory rate sensor monitoring during opioid patient-controlled analgesia after gynaecological surgery: A prospective cohort study

Background and Aims:

Respiratory depression is a rare but serious complication during opioid administration. Therefore, early detection of signs of deterioration is paramount. The current standard of care of using manual intermittent respiratory rate (RR) measurement is labour intensive and inefficient. We evaluated a wireless sensor monitor, Aingeal (Renew Health Ltd, Ireland), to continuously monitor RR, heart rate (HR) and temperature compared to standard clinical measurements.

Methods:

Patients who underwent major gynaecological operations and received postoperative opioid patient-controlled analgesia were recruited. Patients were connected to the sensor monitor via a central station software platform. The primary outcome was comparison of RR between sensor and nursing monitoring, with secondary outcomes being HR and temperature between two methods. Feedback from patients and healthcare providers was also collected. Bland-Altman analyses were used to compare the vital signs recorded in sensor against those in patient's electronic record.

Results:

A total of 1121 hours of vital signs data were analysed. Bias for RR was -0.90 (95% confidence interval (CI): -9.39, 7.60) breaths/min between nursing and averaged sensor readings. Bias for heart rate was -1.12 (95% CI: -26.27, 24.03) and bias for temperature was 1.45 (95% CI: -5.67, 2.76) between the two methods.

Conclusion:

There is satisfactory agreement of RR measurements, as well as HR and temperature measurements, by the wireless sensor monitor with standard clinical intermittent monitoring with overall good user experience.

Side Effects of Intravenous Patient-Controlled Analgesia with Remifentanil Compared with Intermittent Epidural Bolus for Labour Analgesia - A Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Epidural analgesia is considered a gold standard in obstetric anaesthesia and analgesia. However, in situation when it is contraindicated, unwanted by the patient or simply unavailable, remifentanil can be an excellent alternative. The goal of our study is to analyse the side effects of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV PCA) with remifentanil compared with epidural analgesia during delivery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study included 155 pregnant women in term for birth, divided into 2 groups: a remifentanil group (RG), and an epidural group (EG). Patients in the RG received intravenous PCA with remifentanil, while patients in the ЕG received epidural analgesia with programmed intermittent bolus dosing. Our primary outcome was maternal safety; the secondary outcome was neonatal safety.

RESULTS

The results present a significantly lower SaO2 value of the parturients in the RG (96.95 ± 1.4 vs 98.22 ± 0.6), and a significantly higher respiratory rate per minute in the EG at all time points after the onset of analgesia (20.85 ± 1.4 vs 18.67 ± 0.9). There was more frequent sedation, nausea and vomiting in the RG, while in the EG there was a more elevated temperature, itching and irregularities in the CTG record. Regarding the newborn, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the Apgar scores, pH, pCO2, pO2, and bicarbonate, while there was a significantly lower value of the base excess in the RG group.

CONCLUSION

PCA with remifentanil is safe for the mother, foetus and the newborn, with minimal side effects. Continuous respiratory monitoring, oxygen supply and following of all consensus recommendations are mandatory.