• A T Sia, W R Camann, C E Ocampo, R W Goy, H M Tan, and S Rajammal.
• Department of Anaesthesia (O&G), KK Women's and Children's Hospital, 100 Bukit, Singapore 229899. athsia@kkh.com.sg
• Singap Med J. 2003 Sep 1;44(9):464-70.

AimApart from conventional epidural analgesia (EA), the combined spinal-epidural (CSE) modality is fast becoming a popular technique for treating labour pain. In this study, we investigated the differences in the patient profile and outcome between CSE and EA for labour pain in KK Women's and Children's Hospital.MethodologyData pertaining to 1,532 healthy parturients who had received either CSE or EA for labour pain during a six-month period was systematically collected by using a specially designed form. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to determine the independent predictors of patient satisfaction and the relation of parturient factors on the choice of block. The side effects and the outcome of labour were also compared.ResultsCSE accounted for 80% of all neuraxial blocks performed for labour analgesia (vs 20% for EA). Anaesthesiologists were more inclined to using CSE than EA for multiparous parturients (OR 2.03, p<0.01) in a more painful (OR=1.61, p=0.03) and advanced stage of labour (OR=1.12, p=0.03). The need for supplemental analgesics was greater for EA (p<0.01). Patient satisfaction was higher for CSE (OR=1.77, p<0.026). CSE had a higher risk of pruritus (29% vs 14%, p<0.01) but lower risk of post block neural deficits (0% vs 2%, p<0.01) than EA. No difference in the mode of delivery was detected between the two groups.ConclusionCSE is a safe and good alternative to EA as a technique of neuraxial block for labour analgesia.

15 keywords...

hide…