Combined spinal-epidural analgesia in labour

Its effects on delivery outcome

Suneet Kaur Sra Charanjit Singh, Nurlia Yahya, Karis Misiran, Masdar Azlina, Nadia Md Nor, Choon Yee Lee

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background and objectives: Combined spinal-epidural (CSE) has become an increasingly popular alternative to traditional labour epidural due to its rapid onset and reliable analgesia provided. This was a prospective, convenient sampling study to determine the effects of CSE analgesia on labour outcome. Methods: One hundred and ten healthy primigravida parturients with a singleton pregnancy of ≥37 weeks gestation and in the active phase of labour were studied. They were enrolled to the CSE (n = 55) or Non-CSE (n = 55) group based on whether they consented to CSE analgesia. Non-CSE parturients were offered other methods of labour analgesia. The duration of the first and second stage of labour, rate of instrumental vaginal delivery and emergency cesarean section, and Apgar scores were compared. Results: The mean duration of the first and second stage of labour was not significantly different between both groups. Instrumental delivery rates between the groups were not significantly different (CSE group, 11% versus Non-CSE group, 16%). The slightly higher incidence of cesarean section in the CSE group (16% versus 15% in the Non-CSE group) was not statistically significant. Neonatal outcome in terms of Apgar score of less than 7 at 1 and 5. min was similar in both groups. Conclusion: There were no significant differences in the duration of labour, rate of instrumental vaginal delivery and emergency cesarean section, and neonatal outcome in parturients who received compared to those who did not receive CSE for labour analgesia.

Original languagePortuguese
JournalRevista Brasileira de Anestesiologia
DOIs
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 5 Jul 2014

Keywords

  • Combined spinal-epidural
  • Duration of labour
  • Foetal outcome
  • Labour analgesia

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cite this

Combined spinal-epidural analgesia in labour : Its effects on delivery outcome. / Singh, Suneet Kaur Sra Charanjit; Yahya, Nurlia; Misiran, Karis; Azlina, Masdar; Md Nor, Nadia; Lee, Choon Yee.

In: Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia, 05.07.2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{20b5854d4d9846768d197fbf75ec53e5,
title = "Combined spinal-epidural analgesia in labour: Its effects on delivery outcome",
abstract = "Background and objectives: Combined spinal-epidural (CSE) has become an increasingly popular alternative to traditional labour epidural due to its rapid onset and reliable analgesia provided. This was a prospective, convenient sampling study to determine the effects of CSE analgesia on labour outcome. Methods: One hundred and ten healthy primigravida parturients with a singleton pregnancy of ≥37 weeks gestation and in the active phase of labour were studied. They were enrolled to the CSE (n = 55) or Non-CSE (n = 55) group based on whether they consented to CSE analgesia. Non-CSE parturients were offered other methods of labour analgesia. The duration of the first and second stage of labour, rate of instrumental vaginal delivery and emergency cesarean section, and Apgar scores were compared. Results: The mean duration of the first and second stage of labour was not significantly different between both groups. Instrumental delivery rates between the groups were not significantly different (CSE group, 11{\%} versus Non-CSE group, 16{\%}). The slightly higher incidence of cesarean section in the CSE group (16{\%} versus 15{\%} in the Non-CSE group) was not statistically significant. Neonatal outcome in terms of Apgar score of less than 7 at 1 and 5. min was similar in both groups. Conclusion: There were no significant differences in the duration of labour, rate of instrumental vaginal delivery and emergency cesarean section, and neonatal outcome in parturients who received compared to those who did not receive CSE for labour analgesia.",
keywords = "Combined spinal-epidural, Duration of labour, Foetal outcome, Labour analgesia",
author = "Singh, {Suneet Kaur Sra Charanjit} and Nurlia Yahya and Karis Misiran and Masdar Azlina and {Md Nor}, Nadia and Lee, {Choon Yee}",
year = "2014",
month = "7",
day = "5",
doi = "10.1016/j.bjan.2014.09.009",
language = "Portuguese",
journal = "Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia",
issn = "0034-7094",
publisher = "Elsevier Editora Ltda",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Combined spinal-epidural analgesia in labour

T2 - Its effects on delivery outcome

AU - Singh, Suneet Kaur Sra Charanjit

AU - Yahya, Nurlia

AU - Misiran, Karis

AU - Azlina, Masdar

AU - Md Nor, Nadia

AU - Lee, Choon Yee

PY - 2014/7/5

Y1 - 2014/7/5

N2 - Background and objectives: Combined spinal-epidural (CSE) has become an increasingly popular alternative to traditional labour epidural due to its rapid onset and reliable analgesia provided. This was a prospective, convenient sampling study to determine the effects of CSE analgesia on labour outcome. Methods: One hundred and ten healthy primigravida parturients with a singleton pregnancy of ≥37 weeks gestation and in the active phase of labour were studied. They were enrolled to the CSE (n = 55) or Non-CSE (n = 55) group based on whether they consented to CSE analgesia. Non-CSE parturients were offered other methods of labour analgesia. The duration of the first and second stage of labour, rate of instrumental vaginal delivery and emergency cesarean section, and Apgar scores were compared. Results: The mean duration of the first and second stage of labour was not significantly different between both groups. Instrumental delivery rates between the groups were not significantly different (CSE group, 11% versus Non-CSE group, 16%). The slightly higher incidence of cesarean section in the CSE group (16% versus 15% in the Non-CSE group) was not statistically significant. Neonatal outcome in terms of Apgar score of less than 7 at 1 and 5. min was similar in both groups. Conclusion: There were no significant differences in the duration of labour, rate of instrumental vaginal delivery and emergency cesarean section, and neonatal outcome in parturients who received compared to those who did not receive CSE for labour analgesia.

AB - Background and objectives: Combined spinal-epidural (CSE) has become an increasingly popular alternative to traditional labour epidural due to its rapid onset and reliable analgesia provided. This was a prospective, convenient sampling study to determine the effects of CSE analgesia on labour outcome. Methods: One hundred and ten healthy primigravida parturients with a singleton pregnancy of ≥37 weeks gestation and in the active phase of labour were studied. They were enrolled to the CSE (n = 55) or Non-CSE (n = 55) group based on whether they consented to CSE analgesia. Non-CSE parturients were offered other methods of labour analgesia. The duration of the first and second stage of labour, rate of instrumental vaginal delivery and emergency cesarean section, and Apgar scores were compared. Results: The mean duration of the first and second stage of labour was not significantly different between both groups. Instrumental delivery rates between the groups were not significantly different (CSE group, 11% versus Non-CSE group, 16%). The slightly higher incidence of cesarean section in the CSE group (16% versus 15% in the Non-CSE group) was not statistically significant. Neonatal outcome in terms of Apgar score of less than 7 at 1 and 5. min was similar in both groups. Conclusion: There were no significant differences in the duration of labour, rate of instrumental vaginal delivery and emergency cesarean section, and neonatal outcome in parturients who received compared to those who did not receive CSE for labour analgesia.

KW - Combined spinal-epidural

KW - Duration of labour

KW - Foetal outcome

KW - Labour analgesia

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84977950768&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84977950768&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.bjan.2014.09.009

DO - 10.1016/j.bjan.2014.09.009

M3 - Article

JO - Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia

JF - Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia

SN - 0034-7094

ER -