A comparison of patient-controlled epidural pethidine vs. nurse-administered epidural pethidine for analgesia after caesarean section

Authors

  • Yvonne Lim, MMed
  • Sally Wilson
  • Steven Katz, MD

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5055/jom.2006.0016

Keywords:

post-caesarean section analgesia, epidural analgesia, patient-controlled analgesia, pethidine

Abstract

Patient-controlled epidural analgesia with pethidine for post-caesarean section patients has been shown to be efficacious. However, no studies to date have compared it with intermittent nurse-administered epidural pethidine. The aim of this study was to compare the analgesia efficacy, pethidine requirement, side effects, and nurses’ and patients’ satisfaction with these two techniques in postcaesarean section patients. After obtaining informed patient consent, we recruited 34 patients undergoing elective lower-segment caesarean section. A combined spinal epidural technique was used to provide anesthesia for all patients, and 50 mg pethidine was given epidurally at the end of the operation. Patients were assigned to two groups: group P (n = 17) received patient-controlled epidural analgesia with pethidine (25 mg of five mg/ml solution, lockout of 10 minutes and maximum dose of 150 mg/four hours), and group N (n = 17) received nurseadministered epidural pethidine (bolus of 50 mg and maximum dose of 50 mg/two hours) when required. We collected data at six, 12, 24, 36, and 48 hours following initiation of anesthesia. Visual analogue pain scores (median) were lower in group P than in group N, both on movement and at rest, at six, 12, 24, 36, and 48 hours postoperatively (p < 0.05). Total pethidine consumption (median) and frequency of side effects were similar in both groups. Patients in group P exhibited a trend toward earlier return to activities of daily living and care for the newborn; however, this did not reach statistical significance, and there was no difference in maternal satisfaction between the two groups. Satisfaction scores of nurses caring for patients in group P were higher than for those in group N (median 100 mm, interquartile range [IQR] 90 to 100, vs. median 90 mm, IQR 80 to 90, p < 0.05). Patient-controlled epidural analgesia with pethidine improved patients’ pain scores after caesarean section when compared with intermittent nurse-administered epidural pethidine. Regarding the mode of delivery of postoperative analgesia, we noted a higher satisfaction score among nurses caring for group P than among those caring for group N.

Author Biographies

Yvonne Lim, MMed

Associate Consultant, Department of Anaesthesia, KK Women’s and Children’s Hospital, Singapore.

Sally Wilson

Clinical Nurse Consultant, Department of Anaesthesia, Royal Hospital for Women, Sydney, Australia.

Steven Katz, MD

Consultant, Department of Anaesthesia, Royal Hospital for Women, Sydney, Australia.

References

Yarnell RW, Polis T, Reid GN, et al.: Patient-controlled analgesia with epidural meperidine after elective cesarean section. Reg Anesth. 1992; 17: 329-333.

Fanshawe MP: A comparison of patient controlled epidural pethidine versus single dose epidural morphine for analgesia after caesarean section. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1999; 27: 610-614.

Goh JL, Evans SF, Pavy TJ: Patient-controlled epidural analgesia following caesarean delivery: A comparison of pethidine and fentanyl. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1996; 24: 45-50.

Paech MJ, Moore JS, Evans SF: Meperidine for patient-controlled analgesia after cesarean section. Intravenous versus epidural administration. Anesthesiology. 1994; 80: 1268-1276.

Perriss BW, Latham BV, Wilson IH: Analgesia following extradural and i.m. pethidine in post-caesarean section patients. Br J Anaesth. 1990; 64: 355-357.

Rayburn WF, Geranis BJ, Ramadei CA, et al.: Patient-controlled analgesia for post-cesarean section pain. Obstet Gynecol. 1988; 72: 136-139.

Banks S, Pavy T: A portable, disposable device for patientcontrolled epidural analgesia following Caesarean section: Evaluation by patients and nurses. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2001; 41: 372-375.

Ngan Kee WD, Ma ML, Gin T: Patient-controlled epidural analgesia after caesarean section using a disposable device. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997; 37: 304-307.

Ngan Kee WD, Khaw KS, Ma ML: The effect of the addition of adrenaline to pethidine for patient-controlled epidural analgesia after caesarean section. Anaesthesia. 1998; 53: 1012-1016.

Eisenach JC, Grice SC, Dewan DM: Patient-controlled analgesia following cesarean section: A comparison with epidural and intramuscular narcotics. Anesthesiology. 1988; 68: 444-448.

McGrath D, Thurston N, Wright D, et al.: Comparison of one technique of patient-controlled postoperative analgesia with intramuscular meperidine. Pain. 1989; 37: 265-270.

Fitzpatrick R: Surveys of patient satisfaction: II—Designing a questionnaire and conducting a survey. BMJ. 1991; 302: 1129-1132.

Hodnett ED: Pain and women’s satisfaction with the experience of childbirth: A systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 186: S160-S172.

Downloads

Published

03/01/2006

How to Cite

Lim, MMed, Y., S. Wilson, and S. Katz, MD. “A Comparison of Patient-Controlled Epidural Pethidine Vs. Nurse-Administered Epidural Pethidine for Analgesia After Caesarean Section”. Journal of Opioid Management, vol. 2, no. 2, Mar. 2006, pp. 99-104, doi:10.5055/jom.2006.0016.

Issue

Section

Articles