A prospective survey of 1091 Finnish parturients was conducted in order to ascertain mothers' expectations for labour pain relief, to measure the actual pain during all three stages of labour and to question their satisfaction and the adequacy of pain relief on the third day following delivery. Antenatal expectations for pain relief were surveyed. Mothers were questioned on pain levels in the delivery room and 3 days after giving birth. Pain levels were ascertained using a visual pain score method. Antenatally, 90% of all parturients anticipated a need for pain relief during labour. In the delivery room over 80% of all parturients described their pain as very severe to intolerable, only 4% of the multiparous had low pain scores (0-2). After pain treatment 50% of multiparous women still had pain scores from 8 to 10, which reflects a lack of effective pain relief. Dissatisfaction with the childbirth experience was very low, and was associated with instrumental deliveries, but not with the usage of analgesia. 51% of all parturients complained of inadequate pain relief during childbirth, which, in multiparous women, was significantly associated with the second stage of labour.
In a randomized study, the incidence of visceral pain was evaluated in 46 patients undergoing elective caesarean section under spinal or epidural anaesthesia with 0.5% bupivacaine. If the patient experienced pain during the operation, a standard visual analogue scale ranging from 0 to 10 was used to assess the degree of pain. Visceral pain occurred in 12/23 patients in the spinal group and in 13/23 patients in the epidural group. In neither group was a correlation found between the cephalad level of analgesia or the intensity of cutaneous analgesia in the sacral region, and the presence of visceral pain.
In this multicentre, double-blind, parallel group study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of continuous treatment with itraconazole, 200 mg daily for 3 months, in comparison with itraconazole pulse therapy, 400 mg daily 1 week per month for 3 months, in the treatment of toe-nail onychomycosis. The study included 129 patients with distal subungual onychomycosis of the toe-nails, confirmed by microscopy and positive for dermatophyte culture; 65 received continuous treatment and 64 received pulse therapy. Patients were followed up for 9 months after treatment. After 12 months, there were 62 evaluable patients in the continuous group and 59 evaluable patients in the pulse group. The clinical response (i.e. the size of the affected area and the progress of the infection) and mycological cure (i.e. negative results on microscopy and culture) were the main outcome measures. A clinical response was defined as a cure or a marked improvement. Clinical response rates were 69%, in the continuous group, and 81% in the pulse group at month 12; the corresponding mycological cure rates were 66 and 69%. A better improvement in signs and symptoms was noted in the pulse group. Six patients were withdrawn from treatment because of adverse events, not all of which were thought to be drug-related. There were no clinically relevant laboratory abnormalities. We conclude that both regimens are effective, safe and well tolerated. The superiority of one treatment over the other was not established, but the results tended to favour pulse therapy. Equivalence testing confirmed that pulse therapy was at least equivalent to continuous treatment.
Dexmedetomidine disappeared faster than clonidine from the maternal circulation, while even less dexmedetomidine was transported into the fetal circulation. This was due to its greater placental tissue retention, the basis for which probably is the higher lipophilicity of dexmedetomidine.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.