Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40502896›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Patient Satisfaction With Single-Shot Spinal Analgesia for Labor: A Single-Center Study.

Ivan Keser, Slavenka Straus, Denis Imamovic, Mirko Mihalj

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ivan KeserDepartment of Anesthesiology, General Hospital "Prim. Dr. Abdulah Nakaš", Sarajevo, BIH.
Slavenka StrausClinic for Anesthesia and Reanimation, Clinical Center of the University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, BIH.
Denis ImamovicDepartment of Anesthesiology, General Hospital "Prim. Dr. Abdulah Nakaš", Sarajevo, BIH.
Mirko MihaljDepartment of Anesthesiology, University Clinical Hospital Mostar, Mostar, BIH.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background In low- and middle-income countries, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, the availability of epidural analgesia for labor has been limited due to a shortage of anesthesiologists. As an alternative, single-shot spinal analgesia can offer effective pain relief during childbirth. Objective The objective of the study is to evaluate patient satisfaction with single-shot spinal analgesia provided during labor. Methods This descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted at the General Hospital Sarajevo over a two-year period. Fifty parturients received single-shot spinal analgesia during the active phase of labor (cervical dilatation ≥ 5 cm). The analgesic mixture included 0.5% levobupivacaine (0.5 mL), fentanyl (25 mcg), and 0.9% NaCl (1 mL). Pain intensity was assessed using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) before the procedure, 10 minutes afterward, one hour after administration, and during delivery. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire. Results The average duration of labor pain prior to the procedure was four hours. Mean VAS scores were 9 before the procedure, 3 after 10 minutes, 1 after one hour, and 4 during delivery. Spinal analgesia lasted approximately 110 minutes. During this period, 66% of parturients delivered, while in 34%, the effect of analgesia ended before delivery. All patients expressed satisfaction with the analgesia received. Conclusion Single-shot spinal analgesia provided effective pain relief and high patient satisfaction, even among those who did not deliver during the period of analgesic effect. It offered parturients sufficient time to rest and actively participate in the final stage of labor.

Indexed as

labor analgesialow-resource settingsobstetric anesthesiaparturient satisfactionsingle-shot spinalspinal anesthesiavisual analog scale

Identifiers

PMID40502896
PMCPMC12152233

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.