SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2005
Epidural versus non-epidural or no analgesia in labour.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 4 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 78 papers, 22 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
A Randomized Trial of the Impact of Three Labor Analgesia Techniques on Labor Duration in Spontaneously Laboring Nulliparous Parturients
A Randomized Trial of the Impact of Three Labor Analgesia Techniques on Labor Duration in Nulliparous Labor Inductions
Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation During Labor. A Triple Blind Randomized Clinical Trial
Spinal Sufentanil for Relief of Labor Pain in Primi- and Multiparous Parturients
Who cites it
78 citing papers in PubMed, 22 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 234 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis on labour pain management methods utilization and its associated factors among obstetric caregivers in Ethiopia.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Pooled it
- The association between labor epidural analgesia and postpartum depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC women's health · 2020Pooled it
- Women's experiences of pharmacological and non-pharmacological pain relief methods for labour and childbirth: a qualitative systematic review.Reproductive health · 2019Pooled it
- Maternal position in the second stage of labour for women with epidural anaesthesia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Epidural versus non-epidural or no analgesia for pain management in labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Immersion in water during labour and birth.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Massage, reflexology and other manual methods for pain management in labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Relaxation techniques for pain management in labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Position in the second stage of labour for women with epidural anaesthesia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Inhaled analgesia for pain management in labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Planned hospital birth versus planned home birth.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Non-opioid drugs for pain management in labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Pain management for women in labour: an overview of systematic reviews.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Intracutaneous or subcutaneous sterile water injection compared with blinded controls for pain management in labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Aromatherapy for pain management in labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011Pooled it
- Biofeedback for pain management during labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011Pooled it
- Perineal care.BMJ clinical evidence · 2011Pooled it
- Parenteral opioids for maternal pain relief in labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010Pooled it
- Immersion in water in labour and birth.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2009Pooled it
- Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for pain relief in labour.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2009Pooled it
18 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEpidural analgesia is a central nerve block technique achieved by injection of a local anaesthetic close to the nerves that transmit pain and is widely used as a form of pain relief in labour. However, there are concerns regarding unintended adverse effects on the mother and infant.
objectivesTo assess the effects of all modalities of epidural analgesia (including combined -spinal-epidural) on the mother and the baby, when compared with non-epidural or no pain relief during labour. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register (June 2005). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing all modalities of epidural with any form of pain relief not involving regional blockade, or no pain relief in labour. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two of the review authors independently assessed trials for eligibility, methodological quality and extracted all data. Data were entered into RevMan and double checked. Primary analysis was by intention-to-treat; sensitivity analyses excluded trials with > 30% of women receiving un-allocated treatment. MAIN
resultsTwenty-one studies involving 6664 women were included, all but one study compared epidural analgesia with opiates. For technical reasons, data on women's perception of pain relief in labour could only be included from one study which found epidural analgesia to offer better pain relief than non-epidural analgesia (weighted mean difference (WMD) -2.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) -3.82 to -1.38, 1 trial, 105 women). However, epidural analgesia was associated with an increased risk of instrumental vaginal birth (relative risk (RR) 1.38, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.53, 17 trials, 6162 women). There was no evidence of a significant difference in the risk of caesarean delivery (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.23, 20 trials, 6534 women), long-term backache (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.12, 2 trials, 814 women), low neonatal Apgar scores at five minutes (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.10, 14 trials, 5363 women), and maternal satisfaction with pain relief (RR 1.18 95% CI 0.92 to 1.50, 5 trials, 1940 women). No studies reported on rare but potentially serious adverse effects of epidural analgesia. AUTHORS'
conclusionsEpidural analgesia appears to be effective in reducing pain during labour. However, women who use this form of pain relief are at increased risk of having an instrumental delivery. Epidural analgesia had no statistically significant impact on the risk of caesarean section, maternal satisfaction with pain relief and long-term backache and did not appear to have an immediate effect on neonatal status as determined by Apgar scores. Further research may be helpful to evaluate rare but potentially severe adverse effects of epidural analgesia on women in labour and long-term neonatal outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.