分娩硬膜外镇痛期间的上背部、颈部和肩部疼痛:质量改进倡议

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY International journal of obstetric anesthesia Pub Date : 2024-08-22 DOI:10.1016/j.ijoa.2024.104255
{"title":"分娩硬膜外镇痛期间的上背部、颈部和肩部疼痛:质量改进倡议","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ijoa.2024.104255","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Severe upper back/interscapular, neck and shoulder pain during labor epidural analgesia (PLEA) is not uncommon. The objective of this quality initiative was to evaluate the incidence, demographic associations and management of PLEA.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>An eight-month, single-center quality improvement initiative was performed for the detection and management of PLEA. After survey-based consensus among obstetric anaesthetist attendings and fellows, a three-step PLEA treatment protocol with interventions and numeric rating scale (NRS, 0 – 10 scale) pain assessments was introduced. Demographic data and outcomes were compared among parturients with and without PLEA.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Among 2888 women who received labor epidural analgesia from October 2022 through May 2023, 36 (1.2% [95% CI 0.9% to 1.7%]) reported PLEA. Women with PLEA were younger, more likely to be nulliparous, and had a higher body mass index (BMI) than women without PLEA (p &lt; 0.05 for all). A total of 72.2% (26/36) of women with PLEA received at least one protocol treatment. Twenty-three women received first-line therapy, with pain relief in 91.3% (21/23). The median NRS score decreased from 9 [IQR 8–10] to 3 [1–4]. Women with PLEA had a higher incidence of cesarean delivery (CD) and a longer interval between epidural placement and delivery; 52.8 vs. 17.5% (p &lt; 0.001) and 16.5 vs. 6.9 hours (p &lt; 0.001), respectively.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The incidence of PLEA was higher than previously reported. Patients with PLEA were younger, more commonly nulliparous, had higher BMI, longer epidural infusion times and higher CD rates. A three-step treatment protocol was successful in managing PLEA.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":14250,"journal":{"name":"International journal of obstetric anesthesia","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959289X2400267X/pdfft?md5=fcf67ff95adae35953c3cfbec520e257&pid=1-s2.0-S0959289X2400267X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Upper back, neck, and shoulder pain during labor epidural analgesia: a quality improvement initiative\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijoa.2024.104255\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Severe upper back/interscapular, neck and shoulder pain during labor epidural analgesia (PLEA) is not uncommon. The objective of this quality initiative was to evaluate the incidence, demographic associations and management of PLEA.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>An eight-month, single-center quality improvement initiative was performed for the detection and management of PLEA. After survey-based consensus among obstetric anaesthetist attendings and fellows, a three-step PLEA treatment protocol with interventions and numeric rating scale (NRS, 0 – 10 scale) pain assessments was introduced. Demographic data and outcomes were compared among parturients with and without PLEA.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Among 2888 women who received labor epidural analgesia from October 2022 through May 2023, 36 (1.2% [95% CI 0.9% to 1.7%]) reported PLEA. Women with PLEA were younger, more likely to be nulliparous, and had a higher body mass index (BMI) than women without PLEA (p &lt; 0.05 for all). A total of 72.2% (26/36) of women with PLEA received at least one protocol treatment. Twenty-three women received first-line therapy, with pain relief in 91.3% (21/23). The median NRS score decreased from 9 [IQR 8–10] to 3 [1–4]. Women with PLEA had a higher incidence of cesarean delivery (CD) and a longer interval between epidural placement and delivery; 52.8 vs. 17.5% (p &lt; 0.001) and 16.5 vs. 6.9 hours (p &lt; 0.001), respectively.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The incidence of PLEA was higher than previously reported. Patients with PLEA were younger, more commonly nulliparous, had higher BMI, longer epidural infusion times and higher CD rates. A three-step treatment protocol was successful in managing PLEA.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14250,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of obstetric anesthesia\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959289X2400267X/pdfft?md5=fcf67ff95adae35953c3cfbec520e257&pid=1-s2.0-S0959289X2400267X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of obstetric anesthesia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959289X2400267X\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of obstetric anesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959289X2400267X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景分娩硬膜外镇痛(PLEA)期间出现严重的上背部/肩胛骨内侧、颈部和肩部疼痛并不少见。方法针对 PLEA 的检测和管理开展了一项为期 8 个月的单中心质量改进计划。在产科麻醉师主治医师和研究员之间通过调查达成共识后,引入了三步 PLEA 治疗方案,包括干预措施和数字评分法(NRS,0 - 10 分制)疼痛评估。结果在 2022 年 10 月至 2023 年 5 月期间接受分娩硬膜外镇痛的 2888 名产妇中,有 36 人(1.2% [95% CI 0.9% 至 1.7%])报告了 PLEA。与无 PLEA 的女性相比,有 PLEA 的女性更年轻,更有可能是单胎,体重指数(BMI)也更高(均为 p < 0.05)。共有72.2%(26/36)的PLEA女性接受了至少一种方案治疗。23名女性接受了一线治疗,91.3%(21/23)的患者疼痛得到缓解。NRS评分中位数从9[IQR 8-10]降至3[1-4]。PLEA患者的剖宫产(CD)发生率更高,硬膜外置管与分娩之间的间隔时间更长;分别为52.8%对17.5%(p <0.001)和16.5小时对6.9小时(p <0.001)。PLEA患者更年轻、更常见于无子宫、体重指数更高、硬膜外输注时间更长、CD率更高。三步治疗方案可成功控制 PLEA。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Upper back, neck, and shoulder pain during labor epidural analgesia: a quality improvement initiative

Background

Severe upper back/interscapular, neck and shoulder pain during labor epidural analgesia (PLEA) is not uncommon. The objective of this quality initiative was to evaluate the incidence, demographic associations and management of PLEA.

Methods

An eight-month, single-center quality improvement initiative was performed for the detection and management of PLEA. After survey-based consensus among obstetric anaesthetist attendings and fellows, a three-step PLEA treatment protocol with interventions and numeric rating scale (NRS, 0 – 10 scale) pain assessments was introduced. Demographic data and outcomes were compared among parturients with and without PLEA.

Results

Among 2888 women who received labor epidural analgesia from October 2022 through May 2023, 36 (1.2% [95% CI 0.9% to 1.7%]) reported PLEA. Women with PLEA were younger, more likely to be nulliparous, and had a higher body mass index (BMI) than women without PLEA (p < 0.05 for all). A total of 72.2% (26/36) of women with PLEA received at least one protocol treatment. Twenty-three women received first-line therapy, with pain relief in 91.3% (21/23). The median NRS score decreased from 9 [IQR 8–10] to 3 [1–4]. Women with PLEA had a higher incidence of cesarean delivery (CD) and a longer interval between epidural placement and delivery; 52.8 vs. 17.5% (p < 0.001) and 16.5 vs. 6.9 hours (p < 0.001), respectively.

Conclusions

The incidence of PLEA was higher than previously reported. Patients with PLEA were younger, more commonly nulliparous, had higher BMI, longer epidural infusion times and higher CD rates. A three-step treatment protocol was successful in managing PLEA.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
7.10%
发文量
285
审稿时长
58 days
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Obstetric Anesthesia is the only journal publishing original articles devoted exclusively to obstetric anesthesia and bringing together all three of its principal components; anesthesia care for operative delivery and the perioperative period, pain relief in labour and care of the critically ill obstetric patient. • Original research (both clinical and laboratory), short reports and case reports will be considered. • The journal also publishes invited review articles and debates on topical and controversial subjects in the area of obstetric anesthesia. • Articles on related topics such as perinatal physiology and pharmacology and all subjects of importance to obstetric anaesthetists/anesthesiologists are also welcome. The journal is peer-reviewed by international experts. Scholarship is stressed to include the focus on discovery, application of knowledge across fields, and informing the medical community. Through the peer-review process, we hope to attest to the quality of scholarships and guide the Journal to extend and transform knowledge in this important and expanding area.
期刊最新文献
Pain during caesarean delivery: what gets measured, gets managed Obstetric hemorrhage risk assessment using the maximum allowable blood loss calculation: are we on the right track? Anaesthetic considerations for impacted fetal head at caesarean delivery: a focused review Impact of an interdisciplinary process to increase utilization of neuraxial anesthesia for cesarean delivery: A retrospective database analysis Transcutaneous electrical acupuncture point stimulation and quality of recovery following cesarean delivery: A randomized controlled trial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1