硬膜外分娩镇痛:比较连续硬膜外输液(CEI)和计划性间歇硬膜外灌注(PIEB)对产科结局的影响。

Q2 Medicine
Tal Avraham, Yair Binyamin, Sophie Benamram, Daniel Ioscovich, Reut Rotem, Sorina Grisaru-Granovsky, Alexander Ioscovich
{"title":"硬膜外分娩镇痛:比较连续硬膜外输液(CEI)和计划性间歇硬膜外灌注(PIEB)对产科结局的影响。","authors":"Tal Avraham,&nbsp;Yair Binyamin,&nbsp;Sophie Benamram,&nbsp;Daniel Ioscovich,&nbsp;Reut Rotem,&nbsp;Sorina Grisaru-Granovsky,&nbsp;Alexander Ioscovich","doi":"10.2478/rjaic-2021-0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>In the last few years there is a trend of transiting from the continuous epidural infusion (CEI) method for epidural analgesia to a new method - programmed intermittent epidural analgesia (PIEB). This change improves the quality of epidural analgesia, thanks to an increased spread of the anaesthetic in the epidural space and higher maternal satisfaction. Nevertheless, we must make sure that such change of method does not lead to worse obstetric and neonatal outcomes.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This is a retrospective observational case control study. We compared several obstetrical outcomes between the CEI and PIEB groups, such as the rates of instrumental delivery, rates of caesarean section, duration of first and second stages of labour well as APGAR scores. We further segmented the subjects and examined them in groups of nulliparous and multiparous parturients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>2696 parturients were included in this study: 1387 (51.4%) parturients in the CEI group and 1309 (48.6%) parturients in the PIEB group. No significant difference was found in instrumental or caesarean section delivery rates between groups. This result held even when the groups were differentiated between nulliparous and multiparous. No differences were revealed regarding first and second stage duration or APGAR scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study demonstrates transition from the CEI to the PIEB method does not lead to any statistically significant effects on either obstetric or neonatal outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":21279,"journal":{"name":"Romanian journal of anaesthesia and intensive care","volume":"28 1","pages":"29-35"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/55/55/rjaic-28-029.PMC9949009.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Epidural Analgesia for Labour: Comparing the Effects of Continuous Epidural Infusion (CEI) and Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus (PIEB) on Obstetric Outcomes.\",\"authors\":\"Tal Avraham,&nbsp;Yair Binyamin,&nbsp;Sophie Benamram,&nbsp;Daniel Ioscovich,&nbsp;Reut Rotem,&nbsp;Sorina Grisaru-Granovsky,&nbsp;Alexander Ioscovich\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/rjaic-2021-0005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>In the last few years there is a trend of transiting from the continuous epidural infusion (CEI) method for epidural analgesia to a new method - programmed intermittent epidural analgesia (PIEB). This change improves the quality of epidural analgesia, thanks to an increased spread of the anaesthetic in the epidural space and higher maternal satisfaction. Nevertheless, we must make sure that such change of method does not lead to worse obstetric and neonatal outcomes.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This is a retrospective observational case control study. We compared several obstetrical outcomes between the CEI and PIEB groups, such as the rates of instrumental delivery, rates of caesarean section, duration of first and second stages of labour well as APGAR scores. We further segmented the subjects and examined them in groups of nulliparous and multiparous parturients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>2696 parturients were included in this study: 1387 (51.4%) parturients in the CEI group and 1309 (48.6%) parturients in the PIEB group. No significant difference was found in instrumental or caesarean section delivery rates between groups. This result held even when the groups were differentiated between nulliparous and multiparous. No differences were revealed regarding first and second stage duration or APGAR scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study demonstrates transition from the CEI to the PIEB method does not lead to any statistically significant effects on either obstetric or neonatal outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21279,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Romanian journal of anaesthesia and intensive care\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"29-35\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/55/55/rjaic-28-029.PMC9949009.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Romanian journal of anaesthesia and intensive care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/rjaic-2021-0005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Romanian journal of anaesthesia and intensive care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/rjaic-2021-0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:近年来,硬膜外镇痛有由连续硬膜外输注(CEI)方法向程序性硬膜外间歇镇痛(PIEB)方法过渡的趋势。这一变化提高了硬膜外镇痛的质量,这要归功于麻醉在硬膜外腔的扩大和产妇满意度的提高。然而,我们必须确保这种方法的改变不会导致更糟糕的产科和新生儿结局。材料和方法:这是一项回顾性观察性病例对照研究。我们比较了CEI组和PIEB组之间的一些产科结果,如器械分娩率、剖宫产率、第一和第二产程持续时间以及APGAR评分。我们进一步细分受试者,并在未产和多产产妇组中进行检查。结果:本研究共纳入2696例产妇,其中CEI组1387例(51.4%),PIEB组1309例(48.6%)。两组间器械或剖宫产率无显著差异。这一结果,甚至当组区分为无产和多产。第一和第二阶段持续时间或APGAR评分没有差异。结论:我们的研究表明,从CEI到PIEB方法的过渡对产科或新生儿结局没有任何统计学上显著的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Epidural Analgesia for Labour: Comparing the Effects of Continuous Epidural Infusion (CEI) and Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus (PIEB) on Obstetric Outcomes.

Objective: In the last few years there is a trend of transiting from the continuous epidural infusion (CEI) method for epidural analgesia to a new method - programmed intermittent epidural analgesia (PIEB). This change improves the quality of epidural analgesia, thanks to an increased spread of the anaesthetic in the epidural space and higher maternal satisfaction. Nevertheless, we must make sure that such change of method does not lead to worse obstetric and neonatal outcomes.

Materials and methods: This is a retrospective observational case control study. We compared several obstetrical outcomes between the CEI and PIEB groups, such as the rates of instrumental delivery, rates of caesarean section, duration of first and second stages of labour well as APGAR scores. We further segmented the subjects and examined them in groups of nulliparous and multiparous parturients.

Results: 2696 parturients were included in this study: 1387 (51.4%) parturients in the CEI group and 1309 (48.6%) parturients in the PIEB group. No significant difference was found in instrumental or caesarean section delivery rates between groups. This result held even when the groups were differentiated between nulliparous and multiparous. No differences were revealed regarding first and second stage duration or APGAR scores.

Conclusion: Our study demonstrates transition from the CEI to the PIEB method does not lead to any statistically significant effects on either obstetric or neonatal outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Romanian Journal of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care is the official journal of the Romanian Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care and has been published continuously since 1994. It is intended mainly for anaesthesia and intensive care providers, but it is also aimed at specialists in emergency medical care and in pain research and management. The Journal is indexed in Scopus, Embase, PubMed Central as well as the databases of the Romanian Ministry of Education and Research (CNCSIS) B+ category. The Journal publishes two issues per year, the first one in April and the second one in October, and contains original articles, reviews, case reports, letters to the editor, book reviews and commentaries. The Journal is distributed free of charge to the members of the Romanian Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信