↓ Skip to main content

Remifentanil patient controlled analgesia versus epidural analgesia in labour. A multicentre randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Remifentanil patient controlled analgesia versus epidural analgesia in labour. A multicentre randomized controlled trial
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, July 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2393-12-63
Pubmed ID
Authors

Liv M Freeman, Kitty WM Bloemenkamp, Maureen TM Franssen, Dimitri NM Papatsonis, Petra J Hajenius, Marloes E van Huizen, Henk A Bremer, Eline SA van den Akker, Mallory D Woiski, Martina M Porath, Erik van Beek, Nico Schuitemaker, Paulien CM van der Salm, Bianca F Fong, Celine Radder, Caroline J Bax, Marko Sikkema, M Elske van den Akker-van Marle, Jan MM van Lith, Enrico Lopriore, Renske J Uildriks, Michel MRF Struys, Ben Willem J Mol, Albert Dahan, Johanna M Middeldorp

Abstract

Pain relief during labour is a topic of major interest in the Netherlands. Epidural analgesia is considered to be the most effective method of pain relief and recommended as first choice. However its uptake by pregnant women is limited compared to other western countries, partly as a result of non-availability due to logistic problems. Remifentanil, a synthetic opioid, is very suitable for patient controlled analgesia. Recent studies show that epidural analgesia is superior to remifentanil patient controlled analgesia in terms of pain intensity score; however there was no difference in satisfaction with pain relief between both treatments. The proposed study is a multicentre randomized controlled study that assesses the cost-effectiveness of remifentanil patient controlled analgesia compared to epidural analgesia. We hypothesize that remifentanil patient controlled analgesia is as effective in improving pain appreciation scores as epidural analgesia, with lower costs and easier achievement of 24 hours availability of pain relief for women in labour and efficient pain relief for those with a contraindication for epidural analgesia.Eligible women will be informed about the study and randomized before active labour has started. Women will be randomly allocated to a strategy based on epidural analgesia or on remifentanil patient controlled analgesia when they request pain relief during labour. Primary outcome is the pain appreciation score, i.e. satisfaction with pain relief.Secondary outcome parameters are costs, patient satisfaction, pain scores (pain-intensity), mode of delivery and maternal and neonatal side effects.The economic analysis will be performed from a short-term healthcare perspective. For both strategies the cost of perinatal care for mother and child, starting at the onset of labour and ending ten days after delivery, will be registered and compared. This study, considering cost effectiveness of remifentanil as first choice analgesia versus epidural analgesia, could strongly improve the care for 180.000 women, giving birth in the Netherlands yearly by giving them access to pain relief during labour, 24 hours a day. Dutch Trial Register NTR2551, http://www.trialregister.nl.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 90 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 16%
Student > Master 10 11%
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Postgraduate 9 10%
Other 4 4%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 31 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Psychology 4 4%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 36 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 October 2012.
All research outputs
#5,753,397
of 23,878,777 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#1,457
of 4,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,613
of 166,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#9
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,878,777 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,453 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 166,166 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.