OBJECTIVE: To determine if nulliparous women intending to have epidural analgesia have a similar labour profile and delivery outcome to women who intend to have their labour managed using alternative forms of pain relief. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective randomised controlled clinical trial conducted at a tertiary obstetric institution. Nulliparous women intending to deliver vaginally with a term singleton fetus were eligible for recruitment. RESULTS: 1159 women were recruited, of whom 992 were subsequently randomised to receive continuous midwifery support (CMS) or epidural analgesia (EPI) on presentation for delivery. The duration of labour was shorter in the CMS group compared with EPI (10.7 hours (inter quartile (IQ) 7.0,15.2) versus 11.4 hours (IQ 8.2,15.2), p = 0.039). The median duration of the first stage was 8.9 hours (IQ 6,12.5) versus 9.5 hours (IQ 7,12.7) (p = 0.069), and the median duration of the second stage was 1.33 hours (IQ 0.6,2.5) versus 1.48 hours (IQ 0.77,2.6) (p = 0.034). The requirement for oxytocin augmentation in spontaneous labour was 39.8% CMS versus 46.2% EPI (p = 0.129). There was no significant difference in the caesarean section rates. The need for any operative delivery was significantly lower in CMS (43.9% CMS versus 51.5% EPI, p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Nulliparous women have a high usage of epidural analgesia, regardless of their prelabour intentions. In women who do not intend to use epidural analgesia, the temporal delay in insertion compared with those who use epidural analgesia as their primary analgesic modality is associated with a small but statistically significant reduction in overall labour duration and operative delivery rates.
OBJECTIVE: To assess maternal satisfaction with childbirth and intrapartum pain relief in nulliparous women labouring at term. METHODS: Prospective randomised clinical trial comparing epidural and non-epidural analgesic techniques on term labour outcomes in nulliparous women. Within 24 h of delivery the women were surveyed regarding their opinions about the birthing experience and the allocated analgesic regimen. A postal survey was conducted 6 months postpartum to assess opinions about intrapartum analgesia in a subsequent pregnancy. RESULTS: A total of 992 women were randomised to receive continuous midwifery support (CMS) or epidural (EPI) analgesia on presentation for delivery. There was a high crossover rate from CMS to EPI (61.2%) and a lesser non-compliance rate in the EPI group (27.8%). The early post-partum recollections revealed a high satisfaction with epidural analgesia and lower satisfaction with alternative pain relief measures. Ten percent of women in the CMS group reported negative feelings about their allocated pain relief compared with 1% in the EPI group (P < 0.001), and 10% of all women reported negative feelings about their overall childbirth experience. At the 6-month postpartum survey factors associated with the planned use of epidural analgesia in a subsequent pregnancy were induction of labour (odds ratio (OR) 2.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2, 4.7) and prior utilisation of epidural analgesia (OR 28.1, 95% CI 14.5, 54.7). CONCLUSIONS: Maternal satisfaction with intrapartum analgesia was significantly higher with epidural analgesia than non-epidural analgesic techniques. Overall satisfaction scores for labour and delivery were high regardless of analgesic approach, reflecting the multiple issues other than pain relief that are involved in the childbirth experience.
BACKGROUND: Although the labour and delivery outcomes of epidural analgesia have been investigated extensively, the effects on breast-feeding success are not clearly identified. AIM: To investigate the effects of intrapartum epidural analgesia on breast-feeding duration. METHODS: Nulliparous women enrolled in a randomised trial investigating labour and delivery outcomes of intrapartum epidural analgesia were asked about breast-feeding outcomes. Breast-feeding duration was ascertained by a self-report at 2 and 6 months post-partum. Breast-feeding outcomes were analysed as a prospective observational study because of high cross-over rates (43.4%) in the original randomised controlled trial. RESULTS: A total of 992 women were recruited to the trial with 690 (69.6%) receiving epidural analgesia in labour. Breast-feeding was initiated by 95% (n = 946). At 2 and 6 months, 625 (63.5%) and 401 (40.7%), respectively, were still breast-feeding. Intrapartum analgesia (trend P-value = 0.036), mode of delivery (P < 0.001), age (P < 0.001), education (P < 0.001), and smoking in pregnancy (P < 0.001) showed univariate associations with breast-feeding duration. In the subgroup of women with spontaneous onset of labour and vaginal deliveries, after controlling for other obstetric and demographic factors, epidural analgesia but not narcotic analgesia was significantly associated with reduced breast-feeding duration (adjusted hazard ratio 1.44, 95% confidence interval 1.04-1.99). CONCLUSIONS: Nulliparous women have a high use of epidural analgesia in labour. Nulliparous women who choose epidural analgesia are more likely to breast-feed for shorter durations. Further exploration of the factors underlying this association should be undertaken.
BACKGROUND: The effect of intrapartum analgesia on post-partum maternal back and neck pain, headache and migraine, is uncertain.
AIMS: To determine if nulliparous women having epidural analgesia during labour have a similar incidence of the above-mentioned post-partum symptoms compared with women managed using other forms of pain relief.
METHODS: Secondary analysis of cohort data from a randomised trial in which nulliparous women intending to deliver vaginally were randomised to either epidural analgesia (EPI) or continuous midwifery support (CMS) at admission for delivery. Because of high cross-over rates, groups were initially defined by the randomised treatment allocation and the actual treatment received (CMS-CMS n = 185, EPI-CMS n = 117, EPI-EPI n = 376 and CMS-EPI n = 314). Univariate analysis showed no difference between groups, so final analysis was based on the actual treatment received.
RESULTS: Six hundred and ninety women received epidural analgesia (EPIDURAL) and 302 received other methods of pain relief including CMS. Back pain was common before, during and after pregnancy, and risk factors for post-partum back pain at six months were back pain prior to pregnancy or at two months post-partum. Epidural analgesia, mode of delivery, spontaneous or induced labour, birthweight and back pain during pregnancy had no significant relationship with post-partum back pain at six months. Headache was significantly more common in the EPIDURAL group during pregnancy and at two months post-partum, but not at six months. Migraine was not associated with intrapartum analgesia.
CONCLUSIONS: This analysis supports previous research suggesting that epidural analgesia is not a significant risk factor for persisting post-partum back pain, headache or migraine.
To determine if nulliparous women intending to have epidural analgesia have a similar labour profile and delivery outcome to women who intend to have their labour managed using alternative forms of pain relief.
MATERIALS AND METHODS:
A prospective randomised controlled clinical trial conducted at a tertiary obstetric institution. Nulliparous women intending to deliver vaginally with a term singleton fetus were eligible for recruitment.
RESULTS:
1159 women were recruited, of whom 992 were subsequently randomised to receive continuous midwifery support (CMS) or epidural analgesia (EPI) on presentation for delivery. The duration of labour was shorter in the CMS group compared with EPI (10.7 hours (inter quartile (IQ) 7.0,15.2) versus 11.4 hours (IQ 8.2,15.2), p = 0.039). The median duration of the first stage was 8.9 hours (IQ 6,12.5) versus 9.5 hours (IQ 7,12.7) (p = 0.069), and the median duration of the second stage was 1.33 hours (IQ 0.6,2.5) versus 1.48 hours (IQ 0.77,2.6) (p = 0.034). The requirement for oxytocin augmentation in spontaneous labour was 39.8% CMS versus 46.2% EPI (p = 0.129). There was no significant difference in the caesarean section rates. The need for any operative delivery was significantly lower in CMS (43.9% CMS versus 51.5% EPI, p = 0.019).
CONCLUSIONS:
Nulliparous women have a high usage of epidural analgesia, regardless of their prelabour intentions. In women who do not intend to use epidural analgesia, the temporal delay in insertion compared with those who use epidural analgesia as their primary analgesic modality is associated with a small but statistically significant reduction in overall labour duration and operative delivery rates.
