ArticleJournal of anesthesia2008
Maternal satisfaction with single-dose spinal analgesia for labor pain in Indonesia: a landmark study.
Article in Journal of anesthesia, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Safety and Efficiency of Low-Dose Spinal Analgesia Compared to Epidural Analgesia in Treatment of Pain during Labour: A Case Control Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Comparison of the outcomes of normal vaginal delivery with and without spinal anesthesia in mothers admitted to the maternity ward of Firoozabadi Hospital.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2022Article
- Effectiveness of Spinal Analgesia for Labor Pain Compared with Epidural Analgesia.Anesthesiology and pain medicine · 2021Article
- Comparison of Spinal Versus Epidural Analgesia for Vaginal Delivery: A Randomized Double Blinded Clinical Trial.Anesthesiology and pain medicine · 2021Article
- A comparison of the effects of ENTONOX inhalation and spinal anesthesia on labor pain reduction and apgar score in vaginal delivery: a clinical trial study.BioMedicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to assess maternal satisfaction with single-dose spinal analgesia for the management of obstetric pain in Indonesian women. The investigation included 62 laboring women with single pregnancy at term, with 45 primigravidas and 17 multigravidas. The participants' ages ranged from 15 to 29 years. All participants were screened for physical health and were classified as healthy according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists classification system. All 62 parturients received single-dose spinal anesthesia with a 27-gauge pencil-point needle at either the L3-4 or L4-5 intervertebral interspace, with a combination of bupivacaine, 2.5 mg; morphine, 0.25 mg; and clonidine, 45 microg. Maternal satisfaction, duration of pain relief, and side effects were studied. The overall maternal satisfaction with the single-dose spinal technique for labor analgesia in our study group was high, with 50 patients (81%) being very satisfied, and 7 patients (11%) being satisfied with the quality of labor analgesia. Forty-nine patients (79%) stated that they would select single-dose spinal analgesia for pain control in labor in the future. Our study was the first one in Indonesia to assess maternal satisfaction with single-dose spinal analgesia for labor pain. We concluded that single-dose spinal analgesia with a combination of bupivacaine, morphine, and clonidine provided effective labor pain control for Indonesian women, and maternal satisfaction with this technique was very high. This technique is very cost-effective and should be recommended for routine obstetric pain control in Indonesia and other developing countries.
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.