Continuous lumbar epidural analgesia in labour—does delaying ‘pushing’ in the second stage reduce the incidence of instrumental delivery?
- 1 January 1982
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology
- Vol. 2 (3) , 170-172
- https://doi.org/10.3109/01443618209067701
Abstract
It has been proposed that delaying ‘pushing’ in the second stage in labours associated with epidural analgesia will reduce the incidence of instrumental delivery. Two similar groups of 100 primigravid women in labour conducted under epidural analgesia were compared. The first group commenced ‘pushing’ as soon as the second stage was diagnosed, whilst the second group was asked to wait at least one hour before commencing to ‘push’. Sixty-three in the second group were able to comply. The incidence of forceps delivery was not reduced in the group that had been asked to wait, in fact it was higher. Delaying ‘pushing’ in the second stage in labour associated with epidural analgesia is difficult to apply uniformly and is of no practical benefit.Keywords
This publication has 8 references indexed in Scilit:
- Kielland's forceps: association with neonatal morbidity and mortality.BMJ, 1979
- Kielland's forceps: role of antenatal factors in prediction of use.BMJ, 1979
- Lumbar epidural analgesia in labourBMJ, 1977
- Lumbar epidural analgesia in labour: relation to fetal malposition and instrumental delivery.BMJ, 1977
- THE RELATION BETWEEN EASE OF FORCEPS DELIVERY AND SPEED OF CERVICAL DILATATIONBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1976
- A clinical evaluation of the maternal effects of lumbar extradural analgesia for labourAnaesthesia, 1974
- OBSTETRIC CONSEQUENCES OF EPIDURAL ANALGESIA IN NULLIPAROUS PATIENTSThe Lancet, 1971
- SELECTIVE EPIDURAL ANALGESIA AND THE FORCEPS RATEBritish Journal of Anaesthesia, 1969