Home > Journals > Minerva Medica > Past Issues > Minerva Medica 2011 October;102(5) > Minerva Medica 2011 October;102(5):353-61





A Journal on Internal Medicine

Indexed/Abstracted in: Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 1,236




Minerva Medica 2011 October;102(5):353-61

language: English

Regional versus IV analgesics in labor

Sweed N. 1, Sabry N. 2, Azab T. 3, Nour S. 2

1 Faculty of Pharmacy, MSA University , 6th October City, Egypt;
2 Faculty of Pharmacy, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt;
3 Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt


AIM:The aim of this study was to compare combined spinal epidural (CSE), epidural (E) and IV pethidine analgesia and their effects on the mother, fetus, newborn and the labor course.
METHODS: This is a prospective parallel single blind study, where 60 women in active labor were recruited and were allocated to five subgroups to receive analgesia by different routes. The mother and the fetus were assessed. The results were recorded and compared using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and modified Bromage scale for motor block, in addition to other clinical findings.
RESULT: The duration of first stage of labor was significantly longer in the E group, compared with the CSE and IV pethidine groups. When the pain control achieved by CSE bupivacaine and lidocaine was compared with the corresponding epidural, it was found that the first technique achieved better pain control. Women who received pethidine had higher incidence of nausea and vomiting compared to those received CSE or E analgesia. There was no significant difference between the five groups with respect to other side effects.
CONCLUSION: Regional analgesia especially CSE using bupivacaine or lidocaine is a safe effective method for analgesia in labor with relative better efficacy of bupivacaine.

top of page

Publication History

Cite this article as

Corresponding author e-mail