Department of Women's Anaesthesia, KK Women's and Children's Hospital, Singapore.
Anaesthesia. 2013 Mar;68(3):267-75. doi: 10.1111/anae.12093. Epub 2012 Dec 20.
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.
本试验旨在比较在分娩期间行患者自控硬膜外镇痛(PCEA)时,采用与患者需求成比例的变量频率自动推注与固定持续基础输注的镇痛效果。我们共招募了 102 名处于分娩中的产妇,将其随机分为接受新型 PCEA 自动推注组(根据产妇过去 1 小时的镇痛需求历史,每小时自动给予 5ml 的 1 次、2 次、3 次或 4 次强制性推注)或接受常规 PCEA 基础输注组(5ml/h)。与基础输注组相比,自动推注组需要麻醉师补充镇痛药物的爆发性疼痛发生率显著降低,51 例中有 3 例(5.9%),而基础输注组中有 12 例(23.5%,p=0.023)。两组患者罗哌卡因的时间加权平均(SD)每小时消耗量相似,自动推注组为 10.0(3.0)mg,基础输注组为 11.1(3.2)mg(p=0.06)。与基础输注组相比,自动推注组的产妇报告更高的满意度评分,分别为 96.5(5.0)和 89.2(9.4)(p<0.001)。两组产妇的不良反应发生率、产科和新生儿结局无差异。