The New England Journal of Medicine
e-mail icon  FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |    Advanced Search
Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe
 
Original Article
PreviousPrevious
Volume 337:1715-1719 December 11, 1997 Number 24
NextNext

Epidural Analgesia Compared with Combined Spinal–Epidural Analgesia during Labor in Nulliparous Women
Michael P. Nageotte, M.D., David Larson, M.D., Pamela J. Rumney, R.N.C., Mohan Sidhu, M.D., and Katherine Hollenbach, Ph.D.

 Sign up for free e-toc
 

This Article
-Full Text
- PDF

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-PubMed Citation
ABSTRACT

Background Among nulliparous women, there appears to be an association between the use of epidural analgesia during labor and an increased risk of dystocia. We tested the hypothesis that combined spinal–epidural analgesia, which permits ambulation during labor, is associated with a lower incidence of dystocia than continuous lumbar epidural analgesia.

Methods Between July 1995 and September 1996, we randomly assigned 761 nulliparous women in spontaneous labor at term who requested epidural analgesia to receive either continuous lumbar epidural analgesia or a combination of spinal and epidural analgesia. Among the women who received combined spinal–epidural analgesia, some were discouraged from walking and others were encouraged to walk. Maternal and neonatal outcomes, the incidence of dystocia necessitating cesarean section, and measures of patients' satisfaction were compared in the two groups.

Results There were no significant differences in the overall rate of cesarean section, the incidence of dystocia, the frequency of maternal or fetal complications, the patients' or nursing staff's assessment of the adequacy of analgesia, or the degree of overall satisfaction between the two groups. Significantly more women receiving combined spinal–epidural analgesia had pruritus (P<0.001) and requested additional epidural bolus doses of local anesthetic (P = 0.01). For all the women, dystocia necessitating cesarean section was significantly more likely when analgesia was administered with the fetal vertex at a negative station (odds ratio, 2.5; P<0.001) or at less than 4 cm of cervical dilatation (odds ratio, 2.2; P<0.001).

Conclusions As compared with continuous lumbar epidural analgesia, the combination of spinal and epidural analgesia is not associated with an overall decrease in the incidence of cesarean delivery.


Source Information

From Women's Hospital, Long Beach Memorial Medical Center, Long Beach, Calif. (M.P.N., D.L., P.J.R., M.S.); and the Department of Family Preventive Medicine, University of California, San Diego (K.H.).

Address reprint requests to Dr. Nageotte at 2801 Atlantic Ave., Box 1428, Long Beach, CA 90801-1428.

Full Text of this Article


This article has been cited by other articles:



HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  TERMS OF USE  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org

Comments and questions? Please contact us.

The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.