Literature DB >> 831964

Lumbar epidural analgesia in labour: relation to fetal malposition and instrumental delivery.

I J Hoult, A H MacLennan, L E Carrie.   

Abstract

The incidence of instrumental delivery and malposition immediately before delivery was compared in patients who were given lumbar epidural analgesia and those who were not. Instrumental delivery was five times more common and a malposition of the fetal head was more than three times as common in the epidural group as in women who did not receive regional analgesia. Similar incidences were found even when the epidural was electively chosen before labour in the absence of medical indications. The instrumental delivery rate was affected by parity, the length of the second stage of labour, and the return of sensation by the second stage but not by other factors studied. The high incidence (20%) of malposition associated with epidural analgesia was not affected by any of the factors studied. The psychological and physical disadvantages of malposition and instrumental delivery have yet to be assessed. In the meantime, when there are no medical indications for epidural analgesia, the advantages of pain relief should be weighed against those of a normal spontaneous delivery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1977        PMID: 831964      PMCID: PMC1603649          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.1.6052.14

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br Med J        ISSN: 0007-1447


  4 in total

1.  Management of Incoordinate Uterine Action under Continuous Epidural Analgesia.

Authors:  D D Moir; J Willocks
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1967-08-12

2.  A clinical evaluation of the maternal effects of lumbar extradural analgesia for labour.

Authors:  J Moore; G A Murnaghan; M A Lewis
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  1974-09       Impact factor: 6.955

3.  Obstetric consequences of epidural analgesia in nulliparous patients.

Authors:  N Potter; R D Macdonald
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1971-05-22       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Bupivacaine 0.125% in epidural block analgesia during childbirth: clinical evaluation.

Authors:  G Vanderick; K Geerinckx; A L van Steenberge; E de Muylder
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  1974-11       Impact factor: 9.166

  4 in total
  9 in total

Review 1.  Does epidural analgesia increase rate of cesarean section?

Authors:  Michael C Klein
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.275

2.  Association not causation: what is the intervention?

Authors:  Michael C Klein
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2007 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.166

3.  Labour is still painful.

Authors:  M Klein
Journal:  Can Med Assoc J       Date:  1982-02-15       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 4.  The management of term labour.

Authors:  J A Spencer
Journal:  Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 5.747

5.  Epidural analgesia during labour: why does this increase the forceps delivery rate?

Authors:  R G Bates; C W Helm
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  1985-11       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 6.  Labour analgesia. A risk-benefit analysis.

Authors:  R L Eberle; M C Norris
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 5.606

7.  Oxytocin infusion during second stage of labour in primiparous women using epidural analgesia: a randomised double blind placebo controlled trial.

Authors:  N J Saunders; H Spiby; L Gilbert; R B Fraser; J M Hall; P M Mutton; A Jackson; D K Edmonds
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1989-12-09

8.  A comparative study of continuous and intermittent epidural analgesia for labour and delivery.

Authors:  K G Smedstad; D H Morison
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  1988-05       Impact factor: 5.063

9.  Effectiveness of pain relief in labour: survey of 1000 mothers.

Authors:  B Morgan; C J Bulpitt; P Clifton; P J Lewis
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1982-09-11
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.