Trial reportJournal of anesthesia2024
Real-time analgesic efficacy and factors determining drug requirements of combined spinal-epidural analgesia for labor: a prospective cohort study.
Trial report in Journal of anesthesia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of different sufentanil concentrations in epidural labor analgesia on maternal and neonatal outcomes: a propensity score-matched cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Comparison of continuous epidural analgesia, traditional combined spinal-epidural, and modified combined spinal-epidural for labor analgesia: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCombined spinal-epidural analgesia (CSEA) is effective but not sufficient for labor pain. This study was conducted to assess the real-time analgesic efficacy, side effects of anesthetic drug dosage, and maternal satisfaction in labor to provide reference for the optimization of labor analgesia.
methodsThis was a prospective, cohort, single-center study that included 3020 women who received CSEA for labor analgesia. The visual analogue scale (VAS) for labor pain, real-time anesthetic drug dosage, side effects, adverse labor outcomes, factors influencing average drug dosage, and maternal satisfaction with CSEA were assessed.
resultsOverall, the VAS labor pain score was lowest at the first hour after the anesthesia was given. After 4 h for primiparas and 3 h for multiparas, the VAS score was greater than 3 but the anesthetic drug dosage did not reach the maximum allowed dosage at the same time. The average anesthetic drug dosage was positively correlated with fever, urinary retention, uterine atony, prolonged active phase, prolonged second stage, assisted vaginal delivery, and postpartum hemorrhage. The average anesthetic drug dosage was the highest in women ≤ 20 years old, those with a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 24.9 kg/m
conclusionAppropriate age guidance and emphasis on education of labor analgesia, weight management during pregnancy, and real-time anesthetic dosage adjustment during labor based on VAS pain score may have positive effects on the satisfaction of labor analgesia. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER AND REGISTRY: Clinicaltrials.gov (ChiCTR2100051809).
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.