File(s) under permanent embargo
Effect of low-dose mobile versus traditional epidural techniques on mode of delivery: a randomised controlled trial
Background
Epidural analgesia is the most effective labour pain relief but is associated with increased rates of instrumental vaginal delivery and other effects, which might be related to the poor motor function associated with traditional epidural. New techniques that preserve motor function could reduce obstetric intervention. We did a randomised controlled trial to compare low-dose combined spinal epidural and low-dose infusion (mobile) techniques with traditional epidural technique.
Methods
Between Feb 1, 1999, and April 30, 2000, we randomly assigned 1054 nulliparous women requesting epidural pain relief to traditional (n=353), low-dose combined spinal epidural (n=351), or low-dose infusion epidural (n=350). Primary outcome was mode of delivery, and secondary outcomes were progress of labour, efficacy of procedure, and effect on neonates. We obtained data during labour and interviewed women postnatally.
Findings
The normal vaginal delivery rate was 35·1% in the traditional epidural group, 42·7% in the low-dose combined spinal group (odds ratio 1·38 [95% CI 1·01–1·89]; p=0·04); and 42·9% in the low-dose infusion group (1·39 [1·01–1·90]; p=0·04). These differences were accounted for by a reduction in instrumental vaginal delivery. Overall, 5 min APGAR scores of 7 or less were more frequent with low-dose technique. High-level resuscitation was more frequent in the low-dose infusion group.
Epidural analgesia is the most effective labour pain relief but is associated with increased rates of instrumental vaginal delivery and other effects, which might be related to the poor motor function associated with traditional epidural. New techniques that preserve motor function could reduce obstetric intervention. We did a randomised controlled trial to compare low-dose combined spinal epidural and low-dose infusion (mobile) techniques with traditional epidural technique.
Methods
Between Feb 1, 1999, and April 30, 2000, we randomly assigned 1054 nulliparous women requesting epidural pain relief to traditional (n=353), low-dose combined spinal epidural (n=351), or low-dose infusion epidural (n=350). Primary outcome was mode of delivery, and secondary outcomes were progress of labour, efficacy of procedure, and effect on neonates. We obtained data during labour and interviewed women postnatally.
Findings
The normal vaginal delivery rate was 35·1% in the traditional epidural group, 42·7% in the low-dose combined spinal group (odds ratio 1·38 [95% CI 1·01–1·89]; p=0·04); and 42·9% in the low-dose infusion group (1·39 [1·01–1·90]; p=0·04). These differences were accounted for by a reduction in instrumental vaginal delivery. Overall, 5 min APGAR scores of 7 or less were more frequent with low-dose technique. High-level resuscitation was more frequent in the low-dose infusion group.
History
Journal
LancetVolume
358Issue
9275Pagination
19 - 23Publisher
Lancet Publishing GroupLocation
London, EnglandPublisher DOI
ISSN
0140-6736eISSN
1474-547XLanguage
engPublication classification
C1.1 Refereed article in a scholarly journalCopyright notice
2001, ElsevierUsage metrics
Categories
No categories selectedLicence
Exports
RefWorks
BibTeX
Ref. manager
Endnote
DataCite
NLM
DC