FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2108603989> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2108603989 endingPage "704" @default.
• W2108603989 startingPage "693" @default.
• W2108603989 abstract "This is a retrospective review of the medical records of 861 patients admitted for vaginal delivery. Patients were randomized to either epidural analgesia or other analgesic methods of pain relief for labor pains. The primary purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of epidural analgesia on the rate of cesarean section delivery.861 patients were admitted to Saad Specialist Hospital for vaginal delivery between May 1, to September 30, 2006. Patients were divided into Nulliparous (334 patients) and Multiparous (527 patients) populations. Each population was then divided into two groups, epidural and non-epidural group. Epidural analgesia was initiated by a bolus of bupivacaine 0.25% (6 to 10 ml) plus fentanyl (50 to 100 microg), followed by bupivacaine 0.125% plus fentanyl (1 to 2 microg/ml) at the rate of (6 to 12 ml/h). Non-epidural analgesia was initiated by one or mixture of I.M meperidine 50 to 100 mg I.M, promethazine hydrochloride 25 mg, or Ontonox inhalers.In the Nulliparous population a total of 57 patients requested epidural (the epidural gp), while 277 patients received other analgesic methods (the non-epidural gp). There was no difference in the rate of cesarean section deliveries between the two analgesia groups (12 patients of 57 in the epidural group (21.1%), versus 61 patients of 277 (22%) in the non-epidural gp). In the Multiparous population, a total of 49 patients requested epidural analgesia (epidural gp), while 478 patients received other analgesic methods (the non-epidural gp). There was no difference in the rate of cesarean section deliveries between the two analgesia groups (5 of 49 patients (10.2%) in the epidural group compared to 39 of 478 patients (8.2%) in the non-epidural gp). Significantly, more patients in the epidural group had forceps or vacuum assisted deliveries compared to the other analgesia group (the non-epidural gp). This was evident in both the Nulliparous population (7 of 57 patients in the epidural gp (12.3%) compared to 13 of 277 patients (4.7%) in the non-epidural gp, p<0.05), and in the Multiparous population (4 of 49 patients (8.2%) in the epidural gp versus only 6 of 478 patients (1.3%) in the non-epidural gp, p<0.005). Patients in the epidural gp had significantly lower pain scores compared to the other analgesia gp. Nulliparous reported lower pain scores during the first stage (epidural 2 +/- 2 vs non-epidural 5 +/- 4, p<0.0001) and second stage of labor (epidural 3 +/- 3 vs non-epidural 6 +/- 3, p<0.0001). Multiparous scores were (epidural 2 +/- 2 vs non-epidural 4 +/- 3, p<0.0001) in the first stage and (epidural 3 +/- 3 vs non-epidural 5 +/- 4, p = 0.0007) in the second stage. Higher satisfaction rates were reported in epidural groups versus the non-epidural groups. 80% of Nulliparous women who received epidural rated their satisfaction as excellent or good versus 45% in the non-epidural group p<0.001. In the Multiparous population 77% in the epidural versus 43% in the non-epidural groups p<0.001 reported excellent to good satisfaction rates.Epidural analgesia is an effective method of pain relief during labor compared to the other analgesic methods of labor pain relief, and it does not increase the incidence of cesarean section deliveries." @default.
• W2108603989 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2108603989 creator A5034417859 @default.
• W2108603989 creator A5077306515 @default.
• W2108603989 date "2007-10-01" @default.
• W2108603989 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
• W2108603989 title "Does epidural increase the incidence of cesarean delivery or instrumental labor in Saudi populations?" @default.
• W2108603989 cites W106518336 @default.
• W2108603989 cites W1968135559 @default.
• W2108603989 cites W1981580461 @default.
• W2108603989 cites W1993008945 @default.
• W2108603989 cites W2019332974 @default.
• W2108603989 cites W2058108388 @default.
• W2108603989 cites W2079863982 @default.
• W2108603989 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18044297" @default.
• W2108603989 hasPublicationYear "2007" @default.
• W2108603989 type Work @default.
• W2108603989 sameAs 2108603989 @default.
• W2108603989 citedByCount "10" @default.
• W2108603989 countsByYear W21086039892012 @default.
• W2108603989 countsByYear W21086039892014 @default.
• W2108603989 countsByYear W21086039892015 @default.
• W2108603989 countsByYear W21086039892016 @default.
• W2108603989 countsByYear W21086039892017 @default.
• W2108603989 countsByYear W21086039892019 @default.
• W2108603989 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2108603989 hasAuthorship W2108603989A5034417859 @default.
• W2108603989 hasAuthorship W2108603989A5077306515 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConcept C2778408130 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConcept C2779234561 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConcept C2780820201 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConcept C2781072394 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConcept C2781328992 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConcept C2908647359 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConcept C42219234 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConcept C43376680 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConcept C54355233 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConcept C99454951 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConceptScore W2108603989C141071460 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConceptScore W2108603989C2778408130 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConceptScore W2108603989C2779234561 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConceptScore W2108603989C2780820201 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConceptScore W2108603989C2781072394 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConceptScore W2108603989C2781328992 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConceptScore W2108603989C2908647359 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConceptScore W2108603989C42219234 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConceptScore W2108603989C43376680 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConceptScore W2108603989C54355233 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConceptScore W2108603989C71924100 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConceptScore W2108603989C86803240 @default.
• W2108603989 hasConceptScore W2108603989C99454951 @default.
• W2108603989 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2108603989 hasLocation W21086039891 @default.
• W2108603989 hasOpenAccess W2108603989 @default.
• W2108603989 hasPrimaryLocation W21086039891 @default.
• W2108603989 hasRelatedWork W1511725246 @default.
• W2108603989 hasRelatedWork W2015814865 @default.
• W2108603989 hasRelatedWork W2078918216 @default.
• W2108603989 hasRelatedWork W2085656334 @default.
• W2108603989 hasRelatedWork W2180689268 @default.
• W2108603989 hasRelatedWork W2376901254 @default.
• W2108603989 hasRelatedWork W2409329257 @default.
• W2108603989 hasRelatedWork W2899912612 @default.
• W2108603989 hasRelatedWork W2907422169 @default.
• W2108603989 hasRelatedWork W2993003743 @default.
• W2108603989 hasVolume "19" @default.
• W2108603989 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2108603989 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2108603989 magId "2108603989" @default.
• W2108603989 workType "article" @default.