Early versus late initiation of epidural analgesia for labour
Background Pain during childbirth is arguably the most severe pain some women may experience in their lifetime. Epidural analgesia is an effective form of pain relief during labour. Many women have concerns regarding its safety. Furthermore, epidural services and anaesthetic support may not be avail...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Cochrane database of systematic reviews 2014-10, Vol.2014 (10), p.CD007238-CD007238 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background
Pain during childbirth is arguably the most severe pain some women may experience in their lifetime. Epidural analgesia is an effective form of pain relief during labour. Many women have concerns regarding its safety. Furthermore, epidural services and anaesthetic support may not be available consistently across all centres. Observational data suggest that early initiation of epidural may be associated with an increased risk of caesarean section, but the same findings were not seen in recent randomised controlled trials. More recent guidelines suggest that in the absence of a medical contraindication, maternal request is a sufficient medical indication for pain relief during labour. The choice of analgesic technique, agent, and dosage is based on many factors, including patient preference, medical status, and contraindications. There is no systematically reviewed evidence on the maternal and foetal outcomes and safety of this practice.
Objectives
This systematic review aimed to summarise the effectiveness and safety of early initiation versus late initiation of epidural analgesia in women. We considered the obstetric and fetal outcomes relevant to women and side effects of the treatments, including risk of caesarean section, instrumental birth and time to birth.
Search methods
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (12 February 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 1), MEDLINE (January 1966 to February 2014), Embase (January 1980 to February 2014) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
Selection criteria
We included all randomised controlled trials involving women undergoing epidural labour analgesia that compared early initiation versus late initiation of epidural labour analgesia.
Data collection and analysis
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted the data and assessed the trial quality. Data were checked for accuracy.
Main results
We included nine studies with a total of 15,752 women.The overall risk of bias of the studies was low, with the exception of performance bias (blinding of participants and personnel).
The nine studies showed no clinically meaningful difference in risk of caesarean section with early initiation versus late initiation of epidural analgesia for labour (risk ratio (RR) 1.02; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96 to 1.08, nine studies, 15,499 women, high quality evidence). There was no clin |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1465-1858 1465-1858 1469-493X |
DOI: | 10.1002/14651858.CD007238.pub2 |