9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Impacto del uso de analgesia peridural controlada por la paciente en la disminución del dolor durante el trabajo de parto en un hospital del suroccidente colombiano Translated title: Impact of the use of patient-controlled epidural analgesia on pain reduction during labor in a hospital in southwestern colombia

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          RESUMEN Introducción: La analgesia epidural controlada por la paciente (PCA) provee flexibilidad al permitir acomodar la analgesia de acuerdo con las necesidades crecientes del dolor a medida que progresa el trabajo de parto (TP). El propósito de este estudio es objetivar el impacto en el alivio del dolor y satisfacción materna en pacientes en TP con analgesia PCA. Pacientes y métodos: Estudio descriptivo prospectivo realizado en el segundo semestre del 2020. Se incluyeron gestantes con embarazo único con escala verbal numérica (EVN) mayor a 3 y se excluyeron a las pacientes con contraindicaciones para inserción de catéter. Posterior a la inserción, se valoró el dolor y se entregó un cuestionario para calificar el dolor a los 15 min y en el expulsivo. Resultados: La población estaba constituida por mujeres jóvenes, el 72 % con embarazo a término. El catéter peridural se insertó en la fase latente del trabajo de parto en el 53,4 % de los casos. Al momento de la inserción del catéter, la mediana de dolor fue de 8 (6-10), a los 15 minutos 2 (0-4) y en el expulsivo 5 (3-8). El 75 % de las maternas refirieron estar muy satisfechas y el 19 % satisfechas; un 3 % indicaron estar poco satisfechas y el 1 % restante, insatisfechas. La prevalencia náusea y vómito fue del 16 % y 15 %, respectivamente. Conclusiones: PCA como estrategia analgésica durante el trabajo de parto a través de bolos intermitentes a demanda logró un adecuado control del dolor en los primeros minutos posterior a la inserción sin un control óptimo durante el expulsivo, sin embargo, se obtuvo una satisfacción materna global alta.

          Translated abstract

          ABSTRACT Introduction: Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) allows patients to accommodate analgesia according to increasing pain needs as labor progresses. This study aims to objectify the impact on pain relief and maternal satisfaction in labor patients with PCA analgesia. Patients and methods: A prospective descriptive study was carried out in the second semester of 2020. Pregnant women with a singleton pregnancy with a numerical rating scale (NRS) greater than three were included, and patients with contraindications for catheter insertion were excluded. After insertion, pain was assessed, and a questionnaire was given to rate pain at 15 min and during expulsion. Results: The population consisted of young women, 72 % of whom were pregnant at term. The epidural catheter was inserted in the latent phase of labor in 53.4 % of cases. At the time of catheter insertion, the median pain was 8 (6-10), at 15 minutes 2 (0-4), and expulsion 5 (3-8). Seventy-five percent of the mothers reported being very satisfied and 19 % satisfied; 3 % reported being slightly satisfied, and the remaining 1 % dissatisfied. The prevalence of nausea and vomiting was 16 % and 15 %, respectively. Conclusions: PCA as an analgesic strategy during labor through intermittent boluses on-demand achieved adequate pain control in the first minutes after insertion without optimal control during expulsion. However, high overall maternal satisfaction was obtained.

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Epidural versus non-epidural or no analgesia for pain management in labour

          Epidural analgesia is a central nerve block technique achieved by injection of a local anaesthetic close to the nerves that transmit pain, and is widely used as a form of pain relief in labour. However, there are concerns about unintended adverse effects on the mother and infant. This is an update of an existing Cochrane Review ( Epidural versus non‐epidural or no analgesia in labour ), last published in 2011. To assess the effectiveness and safety of all types of epidural analgesia, including combined‐spinal‐epidural (CSE) on the mother and the baby, when compared with non‐epidural or no pain relief during labour. We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth’s Trials Register ( ClinicalTrials.gov ), the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform ( ICTRP ) (30 April 2017), and reference lists of retrieved studies. Randomised controlled trials comparing all types of epidural with any form of pain relief not involving regional blockade, or no pain relief in labour. We have not included cluster‐randomised or quasi‐randomised trials in this update. Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risks of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We assessed selected outcomes using the GRADE approach. Fifty‐two trials met the inclusion criteria and we have included data from 40 trials, involving over 11,000 women. Four trials included more than two arms. Thirty‐four trials compared epidural with opioids, seven compared epidural with no analgesia, one trial compared epidural with acu‐stimulation, one trial compared epidural with inhaled analgesia, and one trial compared epidural with continuous midwifery support and other analgesia. Risks of bias varied throughout the included studies; six out of 40 studies were at high or unclear risk of bias for every bias domain, while most studies were at high or unclear risk of detection bias. Quality of the evidence assessed using GRADE ranged from moderate to low quality. Pain intensity as measured using pain scores was lower in women with epidural analgesia when compared to women who received opioids (standardised mean difference ‐2.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) ‐4.56 to ‐0.73; 1133 women; studies = 5; I 2 = 98%; low‐quality evidence) and a higher proportion were satisfied with their pain relief, reporting it to be "excellent or very good" (average risk ratio (RR) 1.47, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.08; 1911 women; studies = 7; I 2 = 97%; low‐quality evidence). There was substantial statistical heterogeneity in both these outcomes. There was a substantial decrease in the need for additional pain relief in women receiving epidural analgesia compared with opioid analgesia (average RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.25; 5099 women; studies = 16; I 2 = 73%; Tau 2 = 1.89; Chi 2 = 52.07 (P < 0.00001)). More women in the epidural group experienced assisted vaginal birth (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.60; 9948 women; studies = 30; low‐quality evidence). A post hoc subgroup analysis of trials conducted after 2005 showed that this effect is negated when trials before 2005 are excluded from this analysis (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.46). There was no difference between caesarean section rates (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.18; 10,350 women; studies = 33; moderate‐quality evidence), and maternal long‐term backache (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.12; 814 women; studies = 2; moderate‐quality evidence). There were also no clear differences between groups for the neonatal outcomes, admission to neonatal intensive care unit (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.12; 4488 babies; studies = 8; moderate‐quality evidence) and Apgar score less than seven at five minutes (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.02; 8752 babies; studies = 22; low‐quality evidence). We downgraded the evidence for study design limitations, inconsistency, imprecision in effect estimates, and possible publication bias. Side effects were reported in both epidural and opioid groups. Women with epidural experienced more hypotension, motor blockade, fever, and urinary retention. They also had longer first and second stages of labour, and were more likely to have oxytocin augmentation than the women in the opioid group. Women receiving epidurals had less risk of respiratory depression requiring oxygen, and were less likely to experience nausea and vomiting than women receiving opioids. Babies born to women in the epidural group were less likely to have received naloxone. There was no clear difference between groups for postnatal depression, headache, itching, shivering, or drowsiness. Maternal morbidity and long‐term neonatal outcomes were not reported. Epidural analgesia resulted in less reported pain when compared with placebo or no treatment, and with acu‐stimulation. Pain intensity was not reported in the trials that compared epidural with inhaled analgesia, or continuous support. Few trials reported on serious maternal side effects. Low‐quality evidence shows that epidural analgesia may be more effective in reducing pain during labour and increasing maternal satisfaction with pain relief than non‐epidural methods. Although overall there appears to be an increase in assisted vaginal birth when women have epidural analgesia, a post hoc subgroup analysis showed this effect is not seen in recent studies (after 2005), suggesting that modern approaches to epidural analgesia in labour do not affect this outcome. Epidural analgesia had no impact on the risk of caesarean section or long‐term backache, and did not appear to have an immediate effect on neonatal status as determined by Apgar scores or in admissions to neonatal intensive care. Further research may be helpful to evaluate rare but potentially severe adverse effects of epidural analgesia and non‐epidural analgesia on women in labour and long‐term neonatal outcomes. Epidurals for pain relief in labour What is the issue? We set out to assess the effectiveness of all kinds of epidural analgesia (including combined‐spinal‐epidural) on the mother and the baby, when compared with non‐epidural or no pain relief during labour. Why is this important? Pain relief is important for women in labour. Pharmacological methods of pain relief include breathing in of nitrous oxide, injection of opioids and local analgesia with an epidural for a central nerve block. Epidurals are widely used for pain relief in labour and involve an injection of a local anaesthetic into the lower region of the back close to the nerves that transmit pain. Epidural solutions are given by bolus injection (a large, rapid injection), continuous infusion or using a patient‐controlled pump. Lower concentrations of local anaesthetic when given together with an opiate allow women to maintain the ability to move around during labour and to actively participate in the birth. Combined‐spinal‐epidural involves a single injection of local anaesthetic or opiate into the cerebral spinal fluid for fast onset of pain relief, as well as insertion of the epidural catheter for continuing pain relief. Side effects such as itchiness, drowsiness, shivering and fever have been reported. Rare but potentially severe adverse effects of epidural analgesia can occur, such as severe long‐lasting headache after the injection, or nerve injury. What evidence did we find? We searched for evidence in April 2017 and identified 40 trials, involving over 11,000 women, that contributed information to this review. The trials varied in the quality of their methods. All but six studies compared epidural analgesia with injected opioid drugs. Epidurals may relieve labour pain more effectively than opioids, and more women may be more satisfied with epidural as pain relief. Overall, women using epidural analgesia may be more likely to require forceps or ventouse to assist with the birth when compared with opioid drugs. However we did not see this effect in studies conducted since 2005, where the use of lower concentrations of local anaesthetic and more modern epidural techniques such as patient‐controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) were more likely. Epidural in comparison to opioids probably makes little or no difference to caesarean section rates, women with long‐term backache, effects on the baby at birth or the number of babies who were admitted to neonatal intensive care. Women who used epidurals can have problems passing urine and can suffer fever. There are highly variable findings such as a longer labour, experiencing very low blood pressure, and being unable to move for a period of time after the birth (motor blockade), probably due to higher concentrations of local anaesthetic being used in the epidural or the use of epidural infusions rather than epidural doses of pain relief administered at intervals. However, women who received opioid drugs also showed some side effects such as a slowing of their breathing so that they needed to wear an oxygen mask, and more nausea and vomiting. More babies whose mothers received opioids were given a drug to counteract the effects of the opioids. There was no difference between women in the epidural or opioid groups for postnatal depression, headaches, itching, shivering, or drowsiness. Women with epidurals reported less pain compared to women with placebo or no treatment, or acu‐stimulation. Pain was not reported in the trials that compared epidural with inhaled analgesia, or continuous support. What does this mean? Epidurals may reduce pain during labour more effectively than any other form of pain relief, and may increase maternal satisfaction with pain relief. However, some women who have an epidural instead of opioid drugs may be more likely to have an assisted vaginal birth, but this finding probably reflects the higher concentrations of local anaesthetics used traditionally rather than the low concentrations of modern epidurals. Further research would be helpful, using more consistent measures of reducing the adverse outcomes with epidurals.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Patient-controlled epidural analgesia for labor.

            Patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) for labor was introduced into clinical practice 20 yr ago. The PCEA technique has been shown to have significant benefits when compared with continuous epidural infusion. We conducted a systematic review using MEDLINE and EMBASE (1988-April 1, 2008) of all randomized, controlled trials in parturients who received PCEA in labor in which one of the following comparisons were made: background infusion versus none; ropivacaine versus bupivacaine; high versus low concentrations of local anesthetics; and new strategies versus standard strategies. The outcomes of interest were maternal analgesia, satisfaction, motor block, and the incidence of unscheduled clinician interventions. A continuous background infusion improved maternal analgesia and reduced unscheduled clinician interventions. Larger bolus doses (more than 5 mL) may provide better analgesia compared with small boluses. Low concentrations of bupivacaine or ropivacaine provide excellent analgesia without significant motor block. Many strategies with PCEA can provide effective labor analgesia. High volume, dilute local anesthetic solutions with a continuous background infusion appear to be the most successful strategy. Research into new delivery strategies, such as mandatory programmed intermittent boluses and computerized feedback dosing, is ongoing.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Implementation of Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus for the Maintenance of Labor Analgesia.

              Programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) is an exciting new technology that has the potential to improve the maintenance of epidural labor analgesia. PIEB compared with a continuous epidural infusion (CEI) has the potential advantage of greater spread within the epidural space and therefore better sensory blockade. Studies have demonstrated a local anesthetic-sparing effect, fewer instrumental vaginal deliveries, less motor blockade, and improvements in maternal satisfaction with PIEB compared with CEI. However, the optimal PIEB regimen and pump settings remain unknown, and there are a number of logistical issues and practical considerations that should be considered when implementing PIEB. The PIEB bolus size and interval, PIEB start time delay period, and patient-controlled epidural analgesia bolus size and lockout time can influence the efficacy of PIEB used for epidural labor analgesia. Educating all members of the health care team is critical to the success of the technique. This review summarizes the role of PIEB for the maintenance of labor analgesia, outlines implementation strategies, suggests optimal settings, and presents potential limitations of the technique.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                dolor
                Revista de la Sociedad Española del Dolor
                Rev. Soc. Esp. Dolor
                Inspira Network Group, S.L (Madrid, Madrid, Spain )
                1134-8046
                April 2022
                : 29
                : 2
                : 71-77
                Affiliations
                [3] Cali orgnameFundación Valle del Lili orgdiv1Departamento de Anestesiología Colombia
                [1] Cali Valle del Cauca orgnameUniversidad Icesi orgdiv1Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud orgdiv2Departamento de Ciencias Clínicas Colombia
                [2] Cali orgnameCentro de Investigaciones Clínicas orgdiv1Fundación Valle del Lili Colombia
                Article
                S1134-80462022000300003 S1134-8046(22)02900200003
                10.20986/resed.2022.3959/2021
                6e6e7a90-5feb-467b-8fc7-7967f0553170

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

                History
                : 01 December 2021
                : 01 August 2022
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 18, Pages: 7
                Product

                SciELO Spain

                Categories
                Originales

                Analgesia controlada por el paciente (PCA),analgesia obstétrica,analgesia epidural,satisfacción del paciente,Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA),obstetric analgesia,epidural analgesia,patient satisfaction

                Comments

                Comment on this article