Combined spinal‐epidural vs. dural puncture epidural techniques for labour analgesia: a randomised controlled trial*
Primary resultResult — go to the resultRelative risk 0.75 95% CI 0.40–1.39Authors' conclusion
There were no significant differences in the quality of labour analgesia following initiation of a combined spinal-epidural compared with a dural puncture epidural technique.
Study context
- Population
- Term parturients requesting labour epidural analgesiaincluded in the analysis
- Participants
- One hundred participants
- Comparison
- CSE vs dural puncture epidural for labour analgesia initiation
- CSEn = 48
- Dural puncture epiduraln = 52reference
- Primary endpoint
- Quality of labour analgesia: composite of asymmetric block after 30 min (sensory level difference >2 dermatomes), epidural top-ups, catheter adjustment, catheter replacement, failed conversion to neuraxial anaesthesia for caesarean delivery
Methodological detailsMaintenance with PCEA plus programmed intermittent epidural boluses
- Maintenance with PCEA plus programmed intermittent epidural boluses
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
Relative risk
0.75
95% CI 0.40–1.39
P = 0.486
By group
Dural puncture epidural vs CSE
RR 0.75 (95% CI 0.40–1.39); P = 0.486
Further findings
Median
| Outcome | CSE | Dural puncture epidural | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pain scores · 15 minSignificantly lower with CSE | 0 (IQR [range] 0-1[0-8]) | 1 (IQR [range] 0-4 [0-10]) | P = 0.018 |
Original publication
Combined spinal‐epidural vs. dural puncture epidural techniques for labour analgesia: a randomised controlled trial*. Anaesthesia. Published 7 November 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →