3.1. Study Population
After approval by the Ethical Committee of the Hamadan University of Medical Sciences (code: IR.UMSHA.REC.1397.223 & IRCT20120915010841N10) and taking written informed consent from participants, this double-blind, randomized clinical trial was conducted at Fatemieh Hospital of Hamadan in 2018. Data were collected using a researcher-made checklist following the research objectives and variables. Subjects were selected using the convenience sampling method, and the sample size was estimated to be 54 (27 patients in each group). All patients were nulliparous, 18 - 45 years old with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II, at term gestation (37 - 40 weeks), candidate for vaginal delivery under spinal analgesia and in active labor, with a cervical dilation more than 5 cm when requesting labor analgesia.
Exclusion criteria were patients’ refusal to continue the participation, reduction in consciousness level, spinal failure, contraindications to regional anesthesia, receiving narcotic analgesics 24 hours before hospitalization, and allergy to opioids.
3.2. Study Design
Using block randomization with a block size of six for each group, patients were randomly allocated to one of the sufentanil (S) and fentanyl (F) groups. We chose a block randomly, and the first six treatments were allocated according to the block. Then a new block was chosen randomly, and the next six treatments were allocated. The process continued until the allocation of all subjects to a group. Before spinal analgesia, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), and blood oxygen saturation (SPO2) were measured (by non-invasive blood pressure and ECG monitoring, Saadat, Made in Iran) and recoded. Pain score, fetal heart rate, and sedation score before spinal analgesia were recorded in the checklist. Then, the spinal analgesia was performed using the Quinke no.: 26 needle in the L3-L4 or L4-L5 space in the sitting position. The F group received 1.5 mL (75 µg) fentanyl (Feniject, Aburehan, Iran), and the group S received 1.5 mL (7.5 µg) sufentanil (Sufiject, Aburehan, Iran). All intrathecal injections were administered in a 1.5 mL volume. Besides, similar syringes were prepared by an anesthetic nurse according to the block randomization list and were intrathecally injected by an anesthesiologist who had no awareness about the type of drug. After spinal analgesia, pain score (measured using Visual Analog scale (VAS)), blood pressure (systolic, diastolic), HR, RR, fetal heart rate (FHR), SPO2, and sedation score (by Ramsay scale) were assessed every 5 minutes for three times and then were assessed every 15 minutes up to 135 minutes. FHR (measured by fetal cardiac monitoring device), pain relapse time, frequency and severity of pruritus (using the VAS), nausea and vomiting, shivering, patients’ satisfaction, Apgar of the neonates (first and fifth minutes), duration of the first and second stages of labor and the rate of cesarean section were recorded in the checklist. When the analgesic effect was over, and the patient's pain returned (VAS ≥ 6), drugs such as Pethidine (intravenously) or Entonox were administered, depending on the patient’s condition and the progress of the delivery. The pain intensity was assessed using the VAS. In the current study, VAS was measured by using a 10 cm ruler, the score was determined by measuring the distance on the 10‐cm line between the zero and the patient’s mark, therefore scores ranged from 0 - 10, “no pain” on the right side (i.e.) and “worst possible pain” on the left side (i.e. 10). To assess the severity of pruritus, the VAS approach was used, the same as the methodology used for assessing the pain. In this way, patients mark a number on a 10cm ruler based on the severity of their pruritus. The following VAS category was proposed: 0 = no pruritus, > 0- < 4 points = mild pruritus, ≥ 4- < 7 points = moderate pruritus, ≥ 7-< 9 points = severe pruritus, and ≥ 9 points = very severe pruritus. Patients’ satisfaction (subjective assessment of the quality of neuraxial labor analgesia) was defined as a numerical rating scale as a percentage (0 to 100%) reported by the parturient at post-delivery in recovery. Parturients with reported satisfaction lower than 80%, 80% - 90%, and greater than 90% were considered as not satisfied, satisfied, and very satisfied, respectively. Sedation was assessed by Ramsay sedation scale as follows (Table 1):
Table 1.
Ramsay Sedation Scale
| Score | Response |
|---|
| 1 | Anxious, or restless, or both |
| 2 | Cooperative, orientated, and tranquil |
| 3 | Responding to commands |
| 4 | Brisk response to stimulus |
| 5 | Sluggish response to stimulus |
| 6 | No response to stimulus |
3.3. Statistical Analysis
Data were analyzed using SPSS software version 16. To compare pain, Apgar, and sedation scores, and duration of the first and second stages of labor, t-test and Mann-Whitney tests were used. Chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests were used to compare the frequency of complications, fetus bradycardia, and satisfaction. A P value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
LEAVE A COMMENT HERE: