Analgesia in Labor, a Prospective Parallel Study to Compare Regional Analgesia and Intravenous (IV) Pethidine Analgesia

February 4, 2011 updated by: Cairo University

Analgesia in Labor, a Prospective Parallel Single Blind Study to Compare Regional Analgesia (Combined Spinal Epidural Analgesia (CSE), Epidural Analgesia (E)) and Intravenous (IV) Pethidine Analgesia

To compare combined spinal epidural, epidural and IV pethidine analgesia and their effects on the mother, fetus, newborn and the course of labor.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

This is a prospective parallel single blind study, which was approved by the institutional review board of El-Galaa Teaching Hospital, and the research and ethics committee of Faculty of Pharmacy, Cairo University.

This hospital per si was selected for the study because it is large hospital that could provide the study with a diverse population. It has a population of various socio-economic statuses. This would provide the study with a sample of patients with a wide range of characteristics.

Sixty full-term, ASA physical status I or II nulliparous women in active labor with cervical dilatation of 5 cm and cephalic presenting fetus were randomly assigned to one of five groups after providing informed consent.

  • Group 1: received CSE analgesia, where 25 µg of fentanyl was injected intrathecally and a bolus dose of 10 ml of 0.5% lidocaine was injected epidurally. E top-ups of 5-10 ml of 0.5-0.8% lidocaine were then injected upon request.
  • Group 2: received CSE analgesia, where 25 µg of fentanyl was injected intrathecally and a bolus dose of 10 ml of 0.0625% bupivacaine was injected epidurally. E top-ups of 5-10 ml of 0.0625-0.25% bupivacaine were then injected upon request.
  • Group 3: received 50µg of E fentanyl analgesia which was injected intrathecally and a bolus of 10 ml of 0.5% lidocaine was administered through the catheter, followed by lidocaine E top-ups of 5-10 ml of 0.5-0.8% upon request.
  • Group 4: received analgesia, where 50 µg of E fentanyl were injected intrathecally and a bolus dose of 10 ml of 0.125% bupivacaine was administered through the catheter, followed by E bupivacaine top-ups of 5-10 ml of 0.125-0.25% upon request.
  • Group 5: 50 mg of IV pethidine was administered as a loading dose, followed by 0.5 mg/kg, with a total maximum limit of 130 mg.

Study Subjects Excluding Criteria Patients who had diabetes mellitus, neurological disease, pre-eclampsia, or patients who had received parenteral analgesics or patients with contraindication to E or spinal analgesia, or patients with sensitivity to local anesthetics or opioids were excluded from the study.

Study Method All the recruited subjects were screened before the administration of any analgesia. Systolic and diastolic pressures, heart rate and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) were monitored. Fetal heart rate (FHR) was monitored using an external cardiotocograph monitor (Partoconter NST Nihon Kohden).

For the E groups, the degree of motor block was assessed according to a modified Bromage scale (Grade I: free movement of legs and feet; Grade II: just able to flex knees with free movement of feet; Grade III: unable to flex knees, but with free movements of feet; Grade IV: unable to move legs or feet) before administration of E analgesia, 10 and 30 minutes after the first dose. The start of the analgesia was regarded as time 0. The duration of analgesia was taken as the time from the beginning of analgesic injection (time 0) to the time of request for additional analgesia.

The number of analgesic top-ups was recorded and the intervals between each top-up, in addition to the volume and concentration of the drug injected.

The Visual Analogue Pain Scale (VAS) (0 mm = no pain, 100 mm = worst pain imaginable) was measured before administration of analgesia, 10 and 30 minutes after administration of each analgesic dose until the delivery of the baby.

Maternal arterial pressures, heart rate, SpO2, and FHR were noted before the analgesia was given, and afterwards every 30 minutes until delivery.

Maternal temperature was recorded before starting the analgesic regimen and thereafter every hour till the end of labor. Fever was defined as temperature of ≥ 38˚C.

The duration of each stage of labor together with the mode of delivery were recorded.

The total volume of drug injected, total concentration of drug injected, 1-min and 5-min APGAR scores, weight of the neonate were recorded.

Any experienced drug related problem by any of the recruited subjects were recorded.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
60

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Egypt
      • Cairo, Egypt
        • El-Galaa Hospital

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 45 years (Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

Female

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

full-term, ASA physical status I or II nulliparous women in active labor with cervical dilatation of 5 cm and cephalic presenting fetus

Exclusion Criteria:

Patients who had diabetes mellitus, neurological disease, pre-eclampsia, or patients who had received parenteral analgesics or patients with contraindication to E or spinal analgesia, or patients with sensitivity to local anesthetics or opioids were excluded from the study.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Supportive Care
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Active Comparator: Epidura, combined spinal epidura & IV

Gp 1: received CSE analgesia, 25µg of fentanyl injected intrathecally & a bolus of 10 ml of 0.5% lidocaine injected epidurally.

Gp 2: received CSE analgesia, 25µg of fentanyl injected intrathecally & a bolus of 10 ml of 0.0625% bupivacaine injected epidurally.

Gp 3: received 50µg of E fentanyl analgesia, injected intrathecally & a bolus of 10 ml of 0.5% lidocaine, followed by lidocaine E top-ups.

Gp 4: received 50µg of E fentanyl injected intrathecally and a bolus dose of 10 ml of 0.125% bupivacaine, followed by E bupivacaine top-ups.

Gp 5: 50mg of IV pethidine was administered as a loading dose, followed by 0.5 mg/kg.
Other: Epidura, CSE & IV

Gp 1: received CSE analgesia: 25µg of fentanyl & a bolus dose of 10 ml of 0.5% lidocaine was injected epidurally. E top-ups of 5-10 ml of 0.5-0.8% lidocaine were then injected.

Gp 2: received CSE analgesia: 25µg of fentanyl & a bolus dose of 10 ml of 0.0625% bupivacaine was injected epidurally. E top-ups of 5-10 ml of 0.0625-0.25% bupivacaine were then injected.

Gp 3: received 50µg of E fentanyl analgesia & a bolus of 10 ml of 0.5% lidocaine was administered, followed by lidocaine E top-ups of 5-10 ml of 0.5-0.8%.

Gp 4: received analgesia: 50µg of E fentanyl & a bolus dose of 10 ml of 0.125% bupivacaine was administered, followed by E bupivacaine top-ups of 5-10 ml of 0.125-0.25%.

Gp 5: 50mg of IV pethidine was administered as loading dose, followed by 0.5 mg/kg.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Visual Analogue Scale to assess pain control
Time Frame: 24 hours
The Visual Analogue Pain Scale (VAS) (0 mm = no pain, 100 mm = worst pain imaginable) was measured before administration of analgesia, 10 and 30 minutes after administration of each analgesic dose until the delivery of the baby.
24 hours

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
The degree of motor block
Time Frame: 24 hours
The degree of motor block was assessed according to a modified Bromage scale (Grade I: free movement of legs and feet; Grade II: just able to flex knees with free movement of feet; Grade III: unable to flex knees, but with free movements of feet; Grade IV: unable to move legs or feet) before administration of E analgesia, 10 and 30 minutes after the first dose. The start of the analgesia was regarded as time 0. The duration of analgesia was taken as the time from the beginning of analgesic injection (time 0) to the time of request for additional analgesia.
24 hours
Number of top-ups
Time Frame: 24 hours
The number of analgesic top-ups was recorded and the intervals between each top-up, in addition to the volume and concentration of the drug injected.
24 hours
Adverse effects
Time Frame: 24 hours
Any experienced drug related problem by any of the recruited subjects were recorded.
24 hours
Labour Duration
Time Frame: 24 hours
The duration of each stage of labor together with the mode of delivery were recorded.
24 hours

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Cairo University

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Study Director: Nirmeen Sabry, Ph.D, Cairo University

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
July 1, 2009

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
December 1, 2010

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
February 1, 2011

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
February 4, 2011

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
February 4, 2011

First Posted (Estimate)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
February 7, 2011

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
February 7, 2011

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
February 4, 2011

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
July 1, 2009

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • 6111972

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings