Continuous Versus Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia for Labour Analgesia and Their Effects on Maternal Motor Function and Ambulation

1. Bleyaert A, Soetens M, Vaes L, Van Steenberge L, Van der Donck A. Bupivacaine, 0,125 per cent, in obstetric epidural analgesia: Experience in three thousand cases. Anesthesiolgy. 1979; 51: 435–8.10.1097/00000542-197911000-00013496059Search in Google Scholar

2. Gambling DR, Yu P, Cole C, McMorland GH, Pal mer L A. Comparative study of patient controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) and continuous infusion epidural analgesia (CIEA) during labour. Can J Anaesth. 1988; 35: 249–54.10.1007/BF030106183289769Search in Google Scholar

3. Sia AT, Lim Y, Ocampo CE. Computer-integrated patient-controlled epidural analgesia: a preliminary study on a novel approach of providing pain relief in labour. Singapore Med J. 2006; 47: 951–6.Search in Google Scholar

4. Wong CA, Ratliff JT, Sullivan JT, Scavone BM, Toledo P, McCarthy RJ. A randomized comparation of programmed intermittent epidural bolus with continous epidural infusion for labor analgesia. Anesth Analg. 2006; 102: 904–9.10.1213/01.ane.0000197778.57615.1a16492849Search in Google Scholar

5. Petry J, Vercauteren M, Van Mol I, Van Houwe P, Adriaensen HA. Epidural PCA with bupivacaine 0.125%, sufentanil 0.75 microgram and epinephrine 1/800.000 for labor analgesia: is a background in fusion beneficial? Acta Anaesthesiol Belg. 2000; 51(3): 163–6.Search in Google Scholar

6. M. van der Vyver, S. Halpern and G. Joseph. Patient-controlled epidural analgesia versus continuous infusion for labour analgesia: a meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth. 2002; 89: 459–65.10.1093/bja/89.3.459Search in Google Scholar

7. Niels Koopmans, Götz J. K. Wietasch and Michel M. R. F. Struys. Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia regimens for labor analgesia: Background infusion or demand-only? Anesth Analg July. 2009; 109: 284– 91.Search in Google Scholar

8. Srivastava U, Gupta A, Saxena S, Kumar A, Singh S, Saraswat N, Mishra AR, Kannaujia A, Mishra S. Patient Controlled Epidural Analgesia during labour: Effect of addition of background infusion on quality of analgesia & maternal satisfaction. Indian J Anaesth. 2009; 53(6): 649–53.Search in Google Scholar

9. Stephen H. Halpern and Brendan Carvalho. Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia for labour. Anesth Analg. 2009; 108(3): 921–8.10.1213/ane.0b013e3181951a7f19224805Search in Google Scholar

10. Boselli E, Debon R, Cimino Y, Rimmele T, Allaouchiche B, Chassard D. Background infusion is not beneficial during labor patient-controlled analgesia with 0.1% ropivacaine plus 0.5 microg/ml sufentanil. Anesthesiology. 2004; 100(4): 968–72.10.1097/00000542-200404000-0003015087635Search in Google Scholar

11. Kaynar A. Murat. Epidural Infusion: Continuous or Bolus? Anesth Analg. 1999; 89: 534–540.Search in Google Scholar

12. Wilson MJ, Cooper G, MacArthur C, Shennan A. Comparative Obstetric Mobile Epidural Trial (COMET) study group UK. Effect of low dose mo bile versus traditional epidural technique on mode of delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Anesthesiology. 2002; 97(6): 1567–75.Search in Google Scholar

13. Capogna G, Camorcia M, Stirparo S, Farcomeni A. Programmed intermittent epidural bolus versus continous epidural infusion for labor analgesia: The effects of maternal motor function and labor out come. A randomized double-blind study in nulliparous women. Anesth Analg. 2011; 113: 826–31.10.1213/ANE.0b013e31822827b821788309Search in Google Scholar

14. Breen TW, Shapiro T, Glass B, Foster-Payne D, Oriol NE. Epidural anesthesia for labor in an ambu latory patient. Anesth Analg. 1993; 77: 919–24.10.1213/00000539-199311000-000088214727Search in Google Scholar

15. Lim Y, Sia AT, Ocampo C. Automated regular bo luses for epidural analgesia: a comparison with con tinuous infusion. Int Obstet Anesth. 2005; 14: 305–9.10.1016/j.ijoa.2005.05.00416154735Search in Google Scholar

16. Wilson MJA, MacArthur C, Cooper GM, Shennan A. Ambulation in labour and delivery mode: a rando mised controlled trial of high-dose vs mobile epidural analgesia. Anaesthesia. 2009; 64: 266–72.10.1111/j.1365-2044.2008.05756.x19302638Search in Google Scholar

17. Martin EJ, Ruth DJ. Caring for the laboring woman. In: Kenedy BB, Ruth DJ, Martin EJ, editors. Intrapartum manamgement modules. 5^th ed. Philadelphia: Wolter Kluwer Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. 2009. p. 134–5.Search in Google Scholar

18. Chua SM, Sia AT. Automated intermittent epidural boluses improve analgesia induced by intrathecal fentanyl during labour. Can J Anaesth. 2004; 51: 581–5.10.1007/BF0301840215197122Search in Google Scholar

19. Fettes PD, Moore CS, Whitesede JB, McLeod GA, Wildsmith JA. Intermittent vs continous administration of epidural ropivacaine with fentanyl for anal gesia during labour. Brit J Anaesth. 2006; 97: 359– 64.10.1093/bja/ael15716849382Search in Google Scholar

20. George RB, Allen TK, Habib AS. Intermittent epidural bolus compared with continuous epidural infu sions for labor analgesia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Anesth Analg. 2013; 116: 133–44.10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182713b2623223119Search in Google Scholar

21. Ruppen W, Derry S, McQuay H, Moore A. Incidence of epidural hematoma, infection, and neurologic injury in obstetric patients with epidural analge sia/anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 2006; 105: 394–9.10.1097/00000542-200608000-0002316871074Search in Google Scholar

22. Beilin Y, Guinn NR, Bernestein HH, Zahn J. Local anaesthetics and mode of delivery: bupivacaine ver sus ropivacaine versus levobupivacaine. Anesth Analg. 2007; 105: 756–63.10.1213/01.ane.0000278131.73472.f417717236Search in Google Scholar

23. Halpern S. Recent advances in patient –controlled epidural analgesia. Curr Opion Anesth. 2005; 18: 247–51.10.1097/01.aco.0000169229.75938.c816534345Search in Google Scholar

24. Sheng-Huan Ch. et al. Comparison of Patient-contro lled Epidural Analgesia and Continuous Epidural Infusion for Labor Analgesia. Chang Gung Med J. 2006; 29: 576–82.Search in Google Scholar

25. Sia AT, Lim Y, Ocampo CE. Computer-integrated patient-controlled epidural analgesia: a preliminary study on a novel approach of providing pain relief in labour. Singapore Med J. 2006; 47: 951–56.Search in Google Scholar

26. Sia AT, Lim Y, Ocampo C. A comparison of basal infusion with automatic mandatory boluses in par turient-controlled epidural analgesia during labor. Anesth Analg. 2007; 104: 673–38.10.1213/01.ane.0000253236.89376.6017312228Search in Google Scholar

27. Toledo P, Sun J, Grobman WA, Wong CA, Feinglass J, Hasnain-Wynia R. Racial and ethnic disparities in neuraxial labor analgesia. Anesth Analg. 2012; 114(1): 172–78.10.1213/ANE.0b013e318239dc7c22075013Search in Google Scholar

28. Jiménez-Puente, et al. Ethnic differences in the use of intrapartum epidural analgesia. BMC Health Services Research. 2012; 12: 207–11.10.1186/1472-6963-12-207341141022818255Search in Google Scholar

29. Christiaens, et al. Pain acceptance and personal con trol in pain relief in two maternity care models: a cross-national comparison of Belgium and the Net herlands. BMC Health Services Research. 2010; 10: 268–70.10.1186/1472-6963-10-268294427520831798Search in Google Scholar

30. Tasnim S. Perception about Pain Relief During Nor mal Labour Among Health Care Providers Con ducting Delivery. Med Today. 2010; 22(1): 20–23.10.3329/medtoday.v22i1.5600Search in Google Scholar

31. Glance et al. Racial Differences in the Use of Epidural Analgesia for Labor. Anesthesiology. 2007; 106: 19–25.10.1097/00000542-200701000-0000817197841Search in Google Scholar

32. Bauchat R. J, et al. Prior lumbar discectomy surgery does not alter the efficacy of neuroaxial labour anal gesia. Anesth Analg. 2012; 115: 348–53.10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182575e1b22584548Search in Google Scholar

33. Unintentional Dural puncture with a Touhy Needle Increases Risk of Chronic Headache. Anesth Analg. 2012; 115: 124–32.10.1213/ANE.0b013e3182501c0622467897Search in Google Scholar

34. Can S. O, Yilmaz A. A, Hasdogan M, Alkaya F, Turhan C. S, Can F. M, Alanoglu Z. Has the quality of abstracts for randomised controlled trials improved since the release of Cosolidated Standards of repor ting Trial guideline for abstract reporting? A survey of four high-profile anaesthesia journals. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2011; 28: 485–92.10.1097/EJA.0b013e32833fb96f21037480Search in Google Scholar