Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Study flow diagram.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Study flow diagram.

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 2

Risk of bias graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 3

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Epidural versus opioids, outcome: 1.12 Assisted vaginal birth.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 4

Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Epidural versus opioids, outcome: 1.12 Assisted vaginal birth.

Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Epidural versus opioids, outcome: 1.13 Caesarean section.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 5

Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Epidural versus opioids, outcome: 1.13 Caesarean section.

Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Epidural versus opioids, outcome: 1.35 Apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 6

Funnel plot of comparison: 1 Epidural versus opioids, outcome: 1.35 Apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 1 Pain score in labour.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 1 Pain score in labour.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 2 Pain intensity severe or intolerable.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 2 Pain intensity severe or intolerable.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 3 Woman's perception of pain relief in labour.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 3 Woman's perception of pain relief in labour.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 4 Woman's perception of pain relief during first stage of labour.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 4 Woman's perception of pain relief during first stage of labour.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 5 Woman's perception of pain relief during the second stage of labour.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.5

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 5 Woman's perception of pain relief during the second stage of labour.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 6 Satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.6

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 6 Satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 7 Satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ continuous data.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.7

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 7 Satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ continuous data.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 8 Time of administration of pain relief to time pain relief was satisfactory (minutes).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.8

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 8 Time of administration of pain relief to time pain relief was satisfactory (minutes).

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 9 Perceived feeling of poor control in labour.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.9

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 9 Perceived feeling of poor control in labour.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 10 Satisfaction with childbirth experience ‐ proportion rating satisfied to very satisfied.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.10

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 10 Satisfaction with childbirth experience ‐ proportion rating satisfied to very satisfied.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 11 Need for additional means of pain relief.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.11

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 11 Need for additional means of pain relief.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 12 Assisted vaginal birth.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.12

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 12 Assisted vaginal birth.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 13 Caesarean section.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.13

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 13 Caesarean section.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 14 Long‐term backache.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.14

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 14 Long‐term backache.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 15 Hypotension as defined by trial authors.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.15

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 15 Hypotension as defined by trial authors.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 16 Postnatal depression (authors definition, on medication, or self‐reported).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.16

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 16 Postnatal depression (authors definition, on medication, or self‐reported).

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 17 Motor blockade.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.17

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 17 Motor blockade.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 18 Respiratory depression requiring oxygen administration.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.18

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 18 Respiratory depression requiring oxygen administration.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 19 Headache.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.19

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 19 Headache.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 20 Perineal trauma requiring suturing.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.20

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 20 Perineal trauma requiring suturing.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 21 Nausea and vomiting.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.21

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 21 Nausea and vomiting.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 22 Itch.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.22

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 22 Itch.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 23 Fever > 38 º C.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.23

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 23 Fever > 38 º C.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 24 Shivering.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.24

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 24 Shivering.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 25 Drowsiness.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.25

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 25 Drowsiness.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 26 Urinary retention.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.26

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 26 Urinary retention.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 27 Catheterisation during labour.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.27

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 27 Catheterisation during labour.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 28 Malposition.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.28

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 28 Malposition.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 29 Surgical amniotomy.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.29

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 29 Surgical amniotomy.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 30 Acidosis defined by cord arterial pH < 7.2 at delivery.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.30

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 30 Acidosis defined by cord arterial pH < 7.2 at delivery.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 31 Acidosis defined by cord arterial pH < 7.15.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.31

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 31 Acidosis defined by cord arterial pH < 7.15.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 32 Naloxone administration.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.32

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 32 Naloxone administration.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 33 Meconium staining of liquor.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.33

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 33 Meconium staining of liquor.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 34 Neonatal intensive care unit admission.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.34

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 34 Neonatal intensive care unit admission.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 35 Apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.35

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 35 Apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 36 Length of first stage of labour (minutes).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.36

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 36 Length of first stage of labour (minutes).

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 37 Length of second stage of labour (minutes).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.37

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 37 Length of second stage of labour (minutes).

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 38 Oxytocin augmentation.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.38

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 38 Oxytocin augmentation.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 39 Caesarean section for fetal distress.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.39

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 39 Caesarean section for fetal distress.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 40 Caesarean section for dystocia.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.40

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 40 Caesarean section for dystocia.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 41 Sensitivity analysis ‐ allocation concealment: Maternal satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.41

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 41 Sensitivity analysis ‐ allocation concealment: Maternal satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 42 Sensitivity analysis ‐ incomplete outcome data: Maternal satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.42

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 42 Sensitivity analysis ‐ incomplete outcome data: Maternal satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 43 Sensitivity analysis ‐ allocation concealment: Need for additional means of pain relief.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.43

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 43 Sensitivity analysis ‐ allocation concealment: Need for additional means of pain relief.

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 44 Sensitivity analysis ‐ incomplete outcome data: Need for additional means of pain relief.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.44

Comparison 1 Epidural versus opioids, Outcome 44 Sensitivity analysis ‐ incomplete outcome data: Need for additional means of pain relief.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 1 Pain score in labour.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 1 Pain score in labour.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 2 Woman's perception of pain relief during first stage of labour.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 2 Woman's perception of pain relief during first stage of labour.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 3 Woman's perception of pain relief during the second stage of labour.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 3 Woman's perception of pain relief during the second stage of labour.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 4 Pain intensity.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 4 Pain intensity.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 5 Satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.5

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 5 Satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 6 Perceived feeling of poor control in labour.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.6

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 6 Perceived feeling of poor control in labour.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 7 Need for additional means of pain relief.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.7

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 7 Need for additional means of pain relief.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 8 Instrumental delivery.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.8

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 8 Instrumental delivery.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 9 Caesarean section.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.9

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 9 Caesarean section.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 10 Motor blockade.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.10

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 10 Motor blockade.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 11 Headache.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.11

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 11 Headache.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 12 Perineal trauma requiring suturing.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.12

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 12 Perineal trauma requiring suturing.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 13 Nausea and vomiting.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.13

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 13 Nausea and vomiting.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 14 Itch.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.14

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 14 Itch.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 15 Fever > 38 º C.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.15

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 15 Fever > 38 º C.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 16 Shivering.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.16

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 16 Shivering.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 17 Drowsiness.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.17

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 17 Drowsiness.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 18 Urinary retention.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.18

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 18 Urinary retention.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 19 Apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.19

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 19 Apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 20 Length of first stage of labour (minutes).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.20

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 20 Length of first stage of labour (minutes).

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 21 Length of second stage of labour (minutes).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.21

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 21 Length of second stage of labour (minutes).

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 22 Oxytocin augmentation.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.22

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 22 Oxytocin augmentation.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 23 Caesarean section for fetal distress.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.23

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 23 Caesarean section for fetal distress.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 24 Caesarean section for dystocia.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.24

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 24 Caesarean section for dystocia.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 25 Sensitivity analysis ‐ allocation concealment: Need for additional means of pain relief.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.25

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 25 Sensitivity analysis ‐ allocation concealment: Need for additional means of pain relief.

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 26 Sensitivity analysis ‐ incomplete outcome data: Need for additional means of pain relief.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 2.26

Comparison 2 Epidural versus placebo/no treatment, Outcome 26 Sensitivity analysis ‐ incomplete outcome data: Need for additional means of pain relief.

Comparison 3 Epidural versus TENS, Outcome 1 Maternal pain score in labour.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 Epidural versus TENS, Outcome 1 Maternal pain score in labour.

Comparison 3 Epidural versus TENS, Outcome 2 Instrumental delivery.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 Epidural versus TENS, Outcome 2 Instrumental delivery.

Comparison 3 Epidural versus TENS, Outcome 3 Caesarean section.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.3

Comparison 3 Epidural versus TENS, Outcome 3 Caesarean section.

Comparison 3 Epidural versus TENS, Outcome 4 Hypotension as defined by trial authors.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.4

Comparison 3 Epidural versus TENS, Outcome 4 Hypotension as defined by trial authors.

Comparison 3 Epidural versus TENS, Outcome 5 Urinary retention.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.5

Comparison 3 Epidural versus TENS, Outcome 5 Urinary retention.

Comparison 3 Epidural versus TENS, Outcome 6 Nausea and vomiting.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.6

Comparison 3 Epidural versus TENS, Outcome 6 Nausea and vomiting.

Comparison 3 Epidural versus TENS, Outcome 7 Length of second stage of labour (minutes).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.7

Comparison 3 Epidural versus TENS, Outcome 7 Length of second stage of labour (minutes).

Comparison 3 Epidural versus TENS, Outcome 8 Oxytocin augmentation.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 3.8

Comparison 3 Epidural versus TENS, Outcome 8 Oxytocin augmentation.

Comparison 4 Epidural versus inhaled analgesia, Outcome 1 Maternal satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.1

Comparison 4 Epidural versus inhaled analgesia, Outcome 1 Maternal satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good.

Comparison 4 Epidural versus inhaled analgesia, Outcome 2 Caesarean section.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 4.2

Comparison 4 Epidural versus inhaled analgesia, Outcome 2 Caesarean section.

Comparison 5 Epidural versus continuous support, Outcome 1 Satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.1

Comparison 5 Epidural versus continuous support, Outcome 1 Satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good.

Comparison 5 Epidural versus continuous support, Outcome 2 Need for additional means of pain relief.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.2

Comparison 5 Epidural versus continuous support, Outcome 2 Need for additional means of pain relief.

Comparison 5 Epidural versus continuous support, Outcome 3 Instrumental delivery.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.3

Comparison 5 Epidural versus continuous support, Outcome 3 Instrumental delivery.

Comparison 5 Epidural versus continuous support, Outcome 4 Caesarean section.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.4

Comparison 5 Epidural versus continuous support, Outcome 4 Caesarean section.

Comparison 5 Epidural versus continuous support, Outcome 5 Long‐term backache.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.5

Comparison 5 Epidural versus continuous support, Outcome 5 Long‐term backache.

Comparison 5 Epidural versus continuous support, Outcome 6 Headache.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.6

Comparison 5 Epidural versus continuous support, Outcome 6 Headache.

Comparison 5 Epidural versus continuous support, Outcome 7 Nausea and vomiting.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.7

Comparison 5 Epidural versus continuous support, Outcome 7 Nausea and vomiting.

Comparison 5 Epidural versus continuous support, Outcome 8 Cathetherisation during labour.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.8

Comparison 5 Epidural versus continuous support, Outcome 8 Cathetherisation during labour.

Comparison 5 Epidural versus continuous support, Outcome 9 Apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 5.9

Comparison 5 Epidural versus continuous support, Outcome 9 Apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes.

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Epidural compared to opioids in labour (maternal outcomes)

Epidural compared to opioids in labour (maternal outcomes)

Patient or population: women in labour
Setting: hospital setting in Canada, China, Denmark, Egypt, Finland, France, India, Israel, Kuwait, Malaysia, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom, and United States
Intervention: epidural
Comparison: opioids

Outcomes

Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

№ of participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Risk with opioids

Risk with epidural

Pain intensity measured using pain score in labour (lower scores = less pain)

SMD 2.64 lower
(4.56 lower to 0.73 lower)

1133
(5 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
Low 1, 2

Satisfaction with pain relief ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good

Study population

Average RR 1.47
(1.03 to 2.08)

1911
(7 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
Low 1, 2

500 per 1000

735 per 1000
(515 to 1000)

Assisted vaginal birth

Study population

RR 1.44
(1.29 to 1.60)

9948
(30 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
Low 1, 3

99 per 1000

142 per 1000
(127 to 158)

Caesarean section

Study population

RR 1.07
(0.96 to 1.18)

10,350
(33 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
Moderate 1

114 per 1000

122 per 1000
(110 to 135)

Side effects (maternal) ‐ long‐term backache

Study population

RR 1.00
(0.89 to 1.12)

814
(2 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
Moderate 1

585 per 1000

585 per 1000
(520 to 655)

Admission to special care baby unit/neonatal intensive care unit (as defined by trialists)

Study population

RR 1.03
(0.95 to 1.12)

4488
(8 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
Moderate 1

204 per 1000

210 per 1000

(194 to 228)

Apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes

Study population

RR 0.73
(0.52 to 1.02)

8752
(22 RCTs)

⊕⊕⊝⊝
Low 1, 4

17 per 1000

12 per 1000
(9 to 17)

*The risk in the intervention group (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).

CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio; SMD: standardised mean difference

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect
Moderate quality: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different
Low quality: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect
Very low quality: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect

1Downgraded due to limitation of study design (‐1).
2Severe unexplained heterogeneity (‐1).
3Funnel plot suggests possible publication bias (‐1).
4Wide confidence interval crossing the line of no effect (‐1).

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings for the main comparison. Epidural compared to opioids in labour (maternal outcomes)
Comparison 1. Epidural versus opioids

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Pain score in labour Show forest plot

5

1133

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐2.64 [‐4.56, ‐0.73]

2 Pain intensity severe or intolerable Show forest plot

1

60

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

3 Woman's perception of pain relief in labour Show forest plot

3

1166

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐3.36 [‐5.41, ‐1.31]

4 Woman's perception of pain relief during first stage of labour Show forest plot

3

194

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐12.05 [‐19.35, ‐4.75]

5 Woman's perception of pain relief during the second stage of labour Show forest plot

2

164

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐20.75 [‐22.50, ‐19.01]

6 Satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good Show forest plot

7

1911

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.47 [1.03, 2.08]

7 Satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ continuous data Show forest plot

7

3171

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

0.51 [0.10, 0.91]

8 Time of administration of pain relief to time pain relief was satisfactory (minutes) Show forest plot

1

82

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐6.70 [‐8.02, ‐5.38]

9 Perceived feeling of poor control in labour Show forest plot

1

344

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.17 [0.62, 2.21]

10 Satisfaction with childbirth experience ‐ proportion rating satisfied to very satisfied Show forest plot

1

332

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.95 [0.87, 1.03]

11 Need for additional means of pain relief Show forest plot

16

5099

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.10 [0.04, 0.25]

12 Assisted vaginal birth Show forest plot

30

9948

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.44 [1.29, 1.60]

13 Caesarean section Show forest plot

33

10350

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.07 [0.96, 1.18]

14 Long‐term backache Show forest plot

2

814

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.00 [0.89, 1.12]

15 Hypotension as defined by trial authors Show forest plot

10

4212

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

11.34 [1.89, 67.95]

16 Postnatal depression (authors definition, on medication, or self‐reported) Show forest plot

1

313

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.63 [0.38, 1.05]

17 Motor blockade Show forest plot

3

322

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

31.71 [4.16, 241.99]

18 Respiratory depression requiring oxygen administration Show forest plot

5

2031

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.23 [0.05, 0.97]

19 Headache Show forest plot

4

1938

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.06 [0.74, 1.54]

20 Perineal trauma requiring suturing Show forest plot

1

369

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.05 [0.93, 1.18]

21 Nausea and vomiting Show forest plot

15

4440

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.62 [0.45, 0.87]

22 Itch Show forest plot

8

2900

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.19 [0.81, 1.77]

23 Fever > 38 º C Show forest plot

9

4276

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

2.51 [1.67, 3.77]

24 Shivering Show forest plot

1

20

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

5.0 [0.27, 92.62]

25 Drowsiness Show forest plot

6

740

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.48 [0.17, 1.33]

26 Urinary retention Show forest plot

4

343

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

14.18 [4.52, 44.45]

27 Catheterisation during labour Show forest plot

1

111

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

5.68 [0.71, 45.68]

28 Malposition Show forest plot

4

673

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.40 [0.98, 1.99]

29 Surgical amniotomy Show forest plot

2

211

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.03 [0.74, 1.43]

30 Acidosis defined by cord arterial pH < 7.2 at delivery Show forest plot

8

4783

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.81 [0.69, 0.94]

31 Acidosis defined by cord arterial pH < 7.15 Show forest plot

3

480

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.17 [0.64, 2.14]

32 Naloxone administration Show forest plot

10

2645

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.15 [0.10, 0.23]

33 Meconium staining of liquor Show forest plot

5

2295

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.01 [0.84, 1.21]

34 Neonatal intensive care unit admission Show forest plot

8

4488

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.03 [0.95, 1.12]

35 Apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes Show forest plot

22

8752

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.73 [0.52, 1.02]

36 Length of first stage of labour (minutes) Show forest plot

9

2259

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

32.28 [18.34, 46.22]

37 Length of second stage of labour (minutes) Show forest plot

16

4979

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

15.38 [8.97, 21.79]

38 Oxytocin augmentation Show forest plot

19

8351

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.12 [1.00, 1.26]

39 Caesarean section for fetal distress Show forest plot

12

5753

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.32 [0.97, 1.79]

40 Caesarean section for dystocia Show forest plot

13

5938

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.93 [0.79, 1.11]

41 Sensitivity analysis ‐ allocation concealment: Maternal satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good Show forest plot

4

1372

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.42 [0.70, 2.92]

42 Sensitivity analysis ‐ incomplete outcome data: Maternal satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good Show forest plot

3

923

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

1.23 [0.97, 1.55]

43 Sensitivity analysis ‐ allocation concealment: Need for additional means of pain relief Show forest plot

9

3043

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.12 [0.03, 0.53]

44 Sensitivity analysis ‐ incomplete outcome data: Need for additional means of pain relief Show forest plot

9

3740

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

0.15 [0.05, 0.45]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Epidural versus opioids
Comparison 2. Epidural versus placebo/no treatment

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Pain score in labour Show forest plot

2

120

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐9.55 [‐12.91, ‐6.19]

2 Woman's perception of pain relief during first stage of labour Show forest plot

1

60

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐55.90 [‐61.09, ‐50.71]

3 Woman's perception of pain relief during the second stage of labour Show forest plot

1

60

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐55.70 [‐63.54, ‐47.86]

4 Pain intensity Show forest plot

1

60

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.03 [0.00, 0.41]

5 Satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good Show forest plot

1

70

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.32 [1.05, 1.65]

6 Perceived feeling of poor control in labour Show forest plot

2

130

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.89 [0.52, 1.50]

7 Need for additional means of pain relief Show forest plot

2

355

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.14 [0.02, 1.14]

8 Instrumental delivery Show forest plot

4

515

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

3.41 [0.62, 18.80]

9 Caesarean section Show forest plot

5

578

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.46 [0.23, 0.90]

10 Motor blockade Show forest plot

1

60

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

11 Headache Show forest plot

1

60

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

12 Perineal trauma requiring suturing Show forest plot

1

285

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.86 [0.50, 1.50]

13 Nausea and vomiting Show forest plot

2

160

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

11.00 [0.62, 193.80]

14 Itch Show forest plot

1

60

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.0 [0.13, 70.83]

15 Fever > 38 º C Show forest plot

1

70

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

11.0 [0.63, 191.69]

16 Shivering Show forest plot

1

100

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

8.0 [1.04, 61.62]

17 Drowsiness Show forest plot

1

100

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)

7.0 [0.37, 132.10]

18 Urinary retention Show forest plot

2

160

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.0 [0.32, 28.21]

19 Apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes Show forest plot

1

60

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

20 Length of first stage of labour (minutes) Show forest plot

2

189

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

‐55.09 [‐186.26, 76.09]

21 Length of second stage of labour (minutes) Show forest plot

4

344

Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI)

7.66 [‐6.12, 21.45]

22 Oxytocin augmentation Show forest plot

3

415

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.89 [0.63, 1.24]

23 Caesarean section for fetal distress Show forest plot

1

100

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.0 [0.06, 15.55]

24 Caesarean section for dystocia Show forest plot

1

100

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.0 [0.19, 21.36]

25 Sensitivity analysis ‐ allocation concealment: Need for additional means of pain relief Show forest plot

1

70

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.33 [0.01, 7.91]

26 Sensitivity analysis ‐ incomplete outcome data: Need for additional means of pain relief Show forest plot

1

70

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.33 [0.01, 7.91]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 2. Epidural versus placebo/no treatment
Comparison 3. Epidural versus TENS

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Maternal pain score in labour Show forest plot

1

60

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐53.00 [‐57.98, ‐48.02]

2 Instrumental delivery Show forest plot

1

60

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.0 [0.15, 6.64]

3 Caesarean section Show forest plot

1

60

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.0 [0.19, 20.90]

4 Hypotension as defined by trial authors Show forest plot

1

60

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.0 [0.13, 70.83]

5 Urinary retention Show forest plot

1

60

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

3.0 [0.13, 70.83]

6 Nausea and vomiting Show forest plot

1

60

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7 Length of second stage of labour (minutes) Show forest plot

1

60

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

17.90 [5.66, 30.14]

8 Oxytocin augmentation Show forest plot

1

60

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.08 [0.59, 1.97]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 3. Epidural versus TENS
Comparison 4. Epidural versus inhaled analgesia

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Maternal satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good Show forest plot

1

86

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.18 [1.31, 3.62]

2 Caesarean section Show forest plot

1

86

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.63 [0.16, 2.47]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 4. Epidural versus inhaled analgesia
Comparison 5. Epidural versus continuous support

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Satisfaction with pain relief in labour ‐ proportion rating excellent or very good Show forest plot

1

992

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.01 [1.00, 1.02]

2 Need for additional means of pain relief Show forest plot

1

992

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.00 [0.00, 0.03]

3 Instrumental delivery Show forest plot

1

992

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.16 [0.96, 1.39]

4 Caesarean section Show forest plot

1

992

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.21 [0.91, 1.62]

5 Long‐term backache Show forest plot

1

992

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.88 [0.69, 1.11]

6 Headache Show forest plot

1

992

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.96 [0.79, 1.17]

7 Nausea and vomiting Show forest plot

1

992

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.12 [0.80, 1.57]

8 Cathetherisation during labour Show forest plot

1

992

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.16 [1.04, 1.29]

9 Apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes Show forest plot

1

992

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

2.02 [0.61, 6.68]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 5. Epidural versus continuous support