Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus (PIEB) Techniques for Labour Analgesia
NCT ID: NCT06266767
Last Updated: 2024-11-01
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
PHASE4
136 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2024-02-21
2024-10-05
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
A Novel Approach to Optimize Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus (PIEB) Delivery for Labour Analgesia
NCT03871530
Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus Time Interval and Injection Volume
NCT00417027
Comparison of PIEB vs CEI for Labor Analgesia
NCT02949271
Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus For Laboring Obstetrical Women
NCT03712735
PIEB-PCEA Versus CEI-PCEA for Labor Analgesia in Nulliparous
NCT01856166
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Traditionally, epidural analgesia (using low dose mixtures of local anaesthetic and opioid) has been administered by nurse or midwife-controlled manual boluses or as continuous infusion via a dedicated epidural pump (once the epidural catheter has been placed by an anaesthetist). Although these regimens provide an effective form of labour analgesia, patient satisfaction is not always achieved because of the associated lower limb motor block (leg weakness) and the increased risk of requiring instrumental delivery such as a forceps delivery. Due to recent advances in medical technology, new epidural pumps, which allow patient controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) boluses and programmed intermittent epidural (PIEB) boluses, are now available.
Bolus injection through an epidural catheter may result in better distribution of anaesthetic solution in the epidural space when compared with continuous infusion of the same low dose local anaesthetic / opioid mixture. Capogna et al carried out a randomized double-blind study to compare the effects of a programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) regimen with a continuous epidural infusion (CEI). Motor block was reported in 37% in the CEI group and in only 2.7% in the PIEB group (P \< 0.001). The incidence of instrumental delivery was 20% for the CEI group and 7% for the PIEB group (P = 0.03). The total local anaesthetic consumption, number of patients requiring additional PCEA boluses, and mean number of PCEA boluses per patient were also found to be lower in the PIEB group (P \< 0.001). There were no differences in pain scores and duration of labour analgesia. (Capogna et al, 2011) Another randomized controlled study published by Wong et al compared total local anaesthetic (bupivacaine was used in this study) consumption, need for supplemental epidural analgesia, quality of analgesia, and patient satisfaction in women who received programmed intermittent epidural boluses (PIEB) compared with continuous epidural infusion (CEI) for maintenance of labour epidural analgesia. The median total bupivacaine dose per hour of analgesia was significantly less in the PIEB (n = 63) (10.5 mg/h; 95% confidence interval, 9.5-11.8 mg/h) when compared with the CEI group (n = 63) (12.3 mg/h; 95% confidence interval, 10.5-14.0 mg/h) (P \< 0.01). Patient satisfaction scores were also higher in the PIEB group. The authors concluded that PIEB combined with patient controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) provided similar analgesia, but with a smaller bupivacaine dose and better patient satisfaction compared with CEI with PCEA for maintenance of epidural labour analgesia. (Wong et al, 2006) Wong et al carried out another study to evaluate bupivacaine consumption and other analgesic outcomes when the programmed intermittent bolus time interval and volume were manipulated during the maintenance of epidural labour analgesia. They found that extending the programmed intermittent bolus interval and volume from 15 minutes to 60 minutes, and 2.5 mL to 10 mL, respectively, decreased bupivacaine consumption without decreasing patient comfort or satisfaction. (Wong et al, 2011) In our study, we aim to compare the effects of different combinations of PIEB bolus volume and PIEB time interval on the number of PCEA demands / clinician boluses, pain score, local anaesthetic consumption and patient satisfaction in order to find the optimal PIEB volume and PIEB time interval for labour pain relief when used together with a fixed (pre-determined) PCEA regimen.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
SEQUENTIAL
There will be 8 combinations of PIEB/PCEA using an epidural mixture of 0.1% levobupivacaine + 2mcg/ml Fentanyl (n=48). We will exclude the 2 worst performing groups (as assessed by our composite primary outcome). Using sequential optimization, 2 new groups with different combinations of PIEB volume / interval will be added to the remaining 6 groups. Complex 2 therefore will consist of 8 groups of 48 patients (n=6 per group). We anticipate 3 to 4 rounds of recruitment until our statistician determines the 2 best performing groups.
HEALTH_SERVICES_RESEARCH
TRIPLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Group 1
PIEB bolus vol (ml) : 8 PIEB time interval (min) : 60 PCEA bolus vol (ml) : 5 PCEA lockout time interval (min) : 20
Levobupivacaine and Fentanyl
Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus
Group 2
PIEB bolus vol (ml) : 8 PIEB time interval (min) : 45 PCEA bolus vol (ml) : 5 PCEA lockout time interval (min) : 20
Levobupivacaine and Fentanyl
Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus
Group 3
PIEB bolus vol (ml) : 10 PIEB time interval (min) : 30 PCEA bolus vol (ml) : 5 PCEA lockout time interval (min) : 20
Levobupivacaine and Fentanyl
Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus
Group 4
PIEB bolus vol (ml) : 10 PIEB time interval (min) : 45 PCEA bolus vol (ml) : 5 PCEA lockout time interval (min) : 20
Levobupivacaine and Fentanyl
Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus
Group 5
PIEB bolus vol (ml) : 10 PIEB time interval (min) : 60 PCEA bolus vol (ml) : 5 PCEA lockout time interval (min) : 20
Levobupivacaine and Fentanyl
Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus
Group 6
PIEB bolus vol (ml) : 10 PIEB time interval (min) : 75 PCEA bolus vol (ml) : 5 PCEA lockout time interval (min) : 20
Levobupivacaine and Fentanyl
Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus
Group 7
PIEB bolus vol (ml) : 12 PIEB time interval (min) : 60 PCEA bolus vol (ml) : 5 PCEA lockout time interval (min) : 20
Levobupivacaine and Fentanyl
Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus
Group 8
PIEB bolus vol (ml) : 12 PIEB time interval (min) : 45 PCEA bolus vol (ml) : 5 PCEA lockout time interval (min) : 20
Levobupivacaine and Fentanyl
Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Levobupivacaine and Fentanyl
Programmed Intermittent Epidural Bolus
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* In active labour
* ASA 2 patients (pregnant patients are considered to be ASA 2)
* Singleton pregnancy
* \> 37 weeks gestation
* Booking BMI 18 to 35
Exclusion Criteria
* BMI \> 35
* Systemic opioids within the previous 6 hours
* Presence of a fetal anomaly
* Pre-eclampsia
* Bleeding disorders (including coagulation disorders)
* Recent spinal surgery
* Spinal injury
* Elevated intracranial pressure (ICP)
* Neuraxial disorders of any description
* Signs of local or systemic infection
* Patient refusal for neuraxial analgesia
18 Years
50 Years
FEMALE
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Hamad Medical Corporation
INDUSTRY
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Roshan Fernando, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Hamad Medical Corporation, Qatar
Fatima Khatoon, DESAIC
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Hamad Medical Corporation
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Hamad Medical Corporation (HMC)
Doha, Baladīyat ad Dawḩah, Qatar
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
MRC-01-18-157
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.