International journal of obstetric anesthesia
-
Int J Obstet Anesth · Jan 2003
Comparison of continuous infusion versus midwife administered top-ups of epidural bupivacaine for labour analgesia: effect on second stage of labour and mode of delivery.
Using a population-based study we retrospectively compared the effect of continuous versus intermittent top-up epidural analgesia on the outcome of labour at the University Hospital of Wales. We analysed the labour outcome of 410 primigravid deliveries over an 18-month period during a change in delivery suite protocol. ⋯ There were no significant differences in terms of group characteristics, women undergoing assisted vaginal delivery (group 1: 83 vs. group 2: 70, OR 0.8 CI 0.5-1.2), caesarean section (group 1: 59 vs. group 2: 61, OR 1.0 CI 0.6-1.5), and women with prolonged second stage (group 1: 50 vs. group 2: 47, OR 1.1 CI 0.6-1.8). The presumed reduction in motor blockade associated with intermittent top-up epidural regimes did not affect the outcome of labour.
-
Int J Obstet Anesth · Jan 2003
Impact study of the introduction of low-dose epidural (bupivacaine 0.1%/fentanyl 2 microg . mL(-1)) compared with bupivacaine 0.25% for labour analgesia.
We conducted a retrospective analysis of the obstetric effects of introducing a low-dose epidural regimen for epidural analgesia in labour. Before this, all women in our unit requesting epidural analgesia for labour received intermittent boluses (10 mL) of 0.25% bupivacaine. After the introduction of the low-dose service in March 2000, intermittent boluses (10 mL) of 0.1% bupivacaine with fentanyl 2 microg . mL(-1) were given. ⋯ Maternal satisfaction was high in both groups (95 and 97%, respectively). We conclude that the introduction of a low-dose regimen of epidural analgesia for labour reduces the incidence of instrumental deliveries. It also decreases the incidence of bladder catheterisation during labour, but the need for anaesthetic intervention may be greater.
-
Int J Obstet Anesth · Jan 2003
Retrospective review of spinal versus epidural anaesthesia for caesarean section in preeclamptic patients.
A 5-year retrospective survey of anaesthesia for caesarean section for mild/moderate and severe preeclampsia was performed, covering the period between 1 January 1996 and 31 December 2000. One hundred and twenty-one cases of non-labouring preeclamptic patients receiving spinal or epidural anaesthesia for caesarean section were included for analysis. Comparisons were made of the lowest blood pressures recorded before induction of anaesthesia, during the period from induction to delivery and the period from delivery to the end of operation. ⋯ The use of intravenous fluids and ephedrine were also comparable in the two anaesthetic groups. There was no difference in maternal or neonatal outcome. Our result supports the use of spinal anaesthesia in preeclamptic women.