ReviewCureus2025
Mapping the Effectiveness of Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus Versus Continuous Epidural Infusion for Labor Analgesia: A Scoping Review.
Review in Cureus, 2025. 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
- From labor to surgery: expanding the role of programmed intermittent epidural bolus beyond obstetric.Anesthesia and pain medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Epidural analgesia is a cornerstone of labor pain management, utilizing continuous epidural infusion (CEI) or programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) to deliver local anesthetics combined with opioids. Hence, this scoping review maps the evidence on the comparative efficacy and outcomes of CEI versus PIEB in labor analgesia. A comprehensive search was conducted on PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar databases for full-text English-language studies published between 2015 and March 2025. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies comparing CEI and PIEB in healthy term pregnant women, focusing on pain relief, motor block, maternal satisfaction, and obstetric outcomes. Overall, 11 studies were included, from which the results showed that PIEB consistently demonstrated superior pain relief, reduced motor block incidence, and higher maternal satisfaction. PIEB also required fewer anesthetics and fewer rescue boluses. Moreover, trends toward lower instrumental delivery rates and shorter second-stage labor duration were observed, although often statistically nonsignificant. Key research gaps include optimal dosing regimens, direct anesthetic comparisons, and long-term maternal and neonatal outcomes. In conclusion, PIEB appeared superior to CEI for labor analgesia, offering enhanced pain control, reduced motor block, and improved satisfaction. However, large, multicenter randomized controlled trials with standardized protocols and extended follow-up are needed to optimize PIEB and confirm its benefits across diverse populations.
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.