Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016:2016:5740534.
doi: 10.1155/2016/5740534. Epub 2016 Nov 20.

The Effect of Epidural Analgesia on the Delivery Outcome of Induced Labour: A Retrospective Case Series

Affiliations

The Effect of Epidural Analgesia on the Delivery Outcome of Induced Labour: A Retrospective Case Series

Angeliki Antonakou et al. Obstet Gynecol Int. 2016.

Abstract

Objective. To investigate whether the use of epidural analgesia during induced labour was a risk factor for instrumental vaginal delivery and caesarean section (CS) delivery. Study Design. This was a retrospective case series of primigravidae women being induced at term for all indications with a normal body mass index (BMI) at booking and under the age of 40 years. Results. We identified 1,046 women who fulfilled the inclusion criteria of which 31.2% had an epidural analgesia. Those with an epidural analgesia had significantly greater maternal age, higher BMI, greater percentage of oxytocin usage, and a longer first and second stage of labour. Women with an epidural analgesia had a higher instrumental delivery (37.9% versus 16.4%; p < 0.001) and CS delivery rate (26% versus 10.1%; p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis indicated that the use of an epidural was not a risk factor for a CS delivery but was a risk factor for an instrument-assisted delivery (adjusted OR = 3.63; 95% CI: 2.51-5.24; p < 0.001). Conclusion. Our study supports the literature evidence that the use of an epidural increases the instrumental delivery rates. It has also added that there is no effect on CS delivery and the observed increase is due to the presence of confounding factors.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that there are no competing interests regarding the publication of this paper.

References

    1. Department of Health. Statistical Bulletin-NHS Maternity Statistics, England: 2003-2004. London, UK: Department of Health; 2004.
    1. Osterman M. J. K., Martin J. A., Menacker F. Expanded health data from the new birth certificate, 2006. National Vital Statistics Reports. 2009;58(5):1–24. - PubMed
    1. Jones L., Othman M., Dowswell T., et al. Pain management for women in labour: an overview of systematic reviews. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2012;(3)CD009234 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Anim-Somuah M., Smyth R. M., Jones L. Epidural versus non-epidural or no analgesia in labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2011;12CD000331 - PubMed
    1. Boyle A., Reddy U. M., Landy H. J., Huang C.-C., Driggers R. W., Laughon S. K. Primary cesarean delivery in the United States. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2013;122(1):33–40. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3182952242. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources