These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A randomised comparison of variable-frequency automated mandatory boluses with a basal infusion for patient-controlled epidural analgesia during labour and delivery.
    Author: Sia AT, Leo S, Ocampo CE.
    Journal: Anaesthesia; 2013 Mar; 68(3):267-75. PubMed ID: 23278328.
    Abstract:
    This trial was conducted to compare the analgesic efficacy of administering variable-frequency automated boluses at a rate proportional to the patient's needs with fixed continuous basal infusion in patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) during labour and delivery. We recruited a total of 102 parturients in labour who were randomly assigned to receive either a novel PCEA with automated mandatory boluses of 5 ml administered once, twice, three or four times per hour depending on the history of the parturient's analgesic demands over the past hour (Automated bolus group), or a conventional PCEA with a basal infusion of 5 ml.h(-1) (Infusion group). The incidence of breakthrough pain requiring supplementation by an anaesthetist was significantly lower in the Automated bolus group, three out of 51 (5.9%) compared with the Infusion group, 12 out of 51 (23.5%, p = 0.023). The time-weighted mean (SD) hourly consumption of ropivacaine was similar in both groups, 10.0 (3.0) mg in the Automated bolus group vs 11.1 (3.2) mg in the Infusion group (p = 0.06). Parturients from the Automated bolus group reported higher satisfaction scores compared with those in the Infusion group, 96.5 (5.0) vs 89.2 (9.4), respectively (p < 0.001). There was no difference in the incidence of maternal side-effects and obstetric and neonatal outcomes.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]