首页> 外文期刊>PLoS One >Intermittent epidural bolus versus continuous epidural infusions for labor analgesia: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
【24h】

Intermittent epidural bolus versus continuous epidural infusions for labor analgesia: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

机译:间歇性硬膜外推注对延长镇痛的连续硬膜外输注:随机对照试验的荟萃分析

获取原文
           

摘要

There are inconsistent results regarding the efficacy and safety of intermittent epidural bolus (IPB) versus continuous epidural infusions (CPI) for labor analgesia. This study used a meta-analytic approach to assess the safety and treatment efficacy of IPB versus CPI for labor analgesia based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Four electronic databases were used to identify eligible RCTs. Pooled effect estimates at 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Twenty-two RCTs with 2,573 parturients were selected for final analysis. The findings revealed no significant differences between IPB and CPI for the incidences of cesarean and instrumental delivery. IPB was shown to be associated with shorter total duration of labor [weighted mean difference (WMD): ?21.46; 95% CI: ?25.07 to ?17.85; P 0.001], duration of the first of stage of labor (WMD: ?13.41; 95% CI: ?21.01 to ?5.81; P = 0.001), and duration of the second stage of labor (WMD: ?4.98; 95% CI: ?9.32 to ?0.63; P = 0.025). Furthermore, IPB significantly reduced the incidences of required anesthetic interventions compared with CPI [relative risk (RR): 0.61; 95% CI: 0.39–0.95; P = 0.030], whereas there was no significant difference between IPB and CPI for the time required in the first anesthetic intervention (WMD: 7.73; 95% CI: ?33.68–49.15; P = 0.714). The local anesthetic IPB (bupivacaine equivalents) was associated with lower milligrams per hour of local anesthetic (WMD: ?0.89; 95% CI: ?1.41 to ?0.36; P = 0.001) and better maternal satisfaction (WMD: 8.76; 95% CI: 4.18–13.35; P 0.001). There were no significant differences between IPB and CPI for the risk of adverse events. This study found that parturients with IPB have short total duration of labor and duration of the first and second stage of labor, reduced requirements for additional anesthetic interventions, and improved maternal satisfaction.
机译:关于间歇性硬膜外推注(IPB)与延长硬膜外输注(CPI)的疗效镇痛的疗效和安全性存在不一致的结果。本研究采用了荟萃分析方法来评估IPB与基于随机对照试验(RCT)的分析镇痛CPI的安全性和治疗疗效。四个电子数据库用于标识符合条件的RCT。使用随机效应模型计算汇总效应估计为95%置信区间(CIS)。选择了2,573名份额的22个RCT,以进行最终分析。该调查结果显示IPB和CPI之间没有显着差异,用于剖宫产和工具交付的发病。 IPB被证明与劳动力总持续时间相比较短[加权平均值(WMD):21.46; 95%CI:?25.07至?17.85; P& 0.001],劳动期第一阶段的持续时间(WMD:13.41; 95%CI:?21.01至?5.81; P = 0.001),第二阶段的劳动阶段(WMD:4.98; 95%CI: ?9.32到?0.63; p = 0.025)。此外,与CPI相比,IPB显着降低了所需麻醉干预的发病率[相对风险(RR):0.61; 95%CI:0.39-0.95; P = 0.030],而IPB和CPI之间没有显着差异,以便在第一个麻醉干预所需的时间(WMD:7.73; 95%CI:?33.68-49.15; P = 0.714)。局部麻醉IPB(Bupivacaine等同物)与每小时局部麻醉剂(WMD:0.89; 95%CI:?1.41至0.36; P = 0.001)和更好的孕产妇满意度(WMD:8.76; 95%CI; :4.18-13.35; p <0.001)。 IPB与CPI之间没有显着差异,造成不良事件的风险。本研究发现,具有IPB的群体总劳动持续时间较短,劳动力第一和第二阶段的持续时间,减少了额外麻醉干预的要求,并提高了孕产妇满意度。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号