CNS Drugs

, Volume 23, Issue 8, pp 669–679 | Cite as

The Management of Breakthrough Pain During Labour

  • Nicholas Akerman
  • Martin Dresner
Therapy in Practice


There is a long history of attempts to alleviate the pain of childbirth, particularly in Asian and Middle Eastern civilisations. In the UK, it was the administration of chloroform to Queen Victoria by John Snow in 1853 that is widely credited with popularizing the idea that labour pain should and could be treated. Medical analgesia is now well established around the globe with a wealth of research evidence describing methods, efficacy and complications.

In this article, we define ‘primary breakthrough pain’ as the moment when a woman first requests analgesia during labour. The management of this can include simple emotional support, inhaled analgesics, parenteral opioids and epidural analgesia.

‘Secondary breakthrough pain’ can be defined as the moment when previously used analgesia becomes ineffective. We concentrate our discussion of this phenomenon on the situation when epidural analgesia begins to fail. Only epidural analgesia offers the potential for complete analgesia, so when this effect is lost the recipient can experience significant distress and dissatisfaction. The best strategy to avert this problem is prevention by using the best techniques for epidural catheterisation and the most effective drug combinations. Even then, epidurals can lose their efficacy for a variety of reasons, and management is hampered by the fact that each rescue manoeuvre takes about 30 minutes to be effective. If the rescue protocol is too cautious, analgesia may not be successfully restored before delivery, leading to patient dissatisfaction. We therefore propose an aggressive response to epidural breakthrough pain using appropriate drug supplementation and, if necessary, the placement of a new epidural catheter. Combined spinal epidural techniques offer several advantages in this situation. The goal is to re-establish analgesia within 11 hour.

The primary aim of pain management during labour and delivery is to provide the level of comfort determined as acceptable to each individual woman. Some require little or no analgesia, while others demand complete abolition of pain. Whatever the individual’s personal point of breakthrough pain is, supporting clinicians should respond logically and rapidly to re-establish analgesia using locally agreed protocols. This approach will maximize patient satisfaction and hopefully increase the pleasure and satisfaction of childbirth.


Bupivacaine Sevoflurane Remifentanil Epidural Analgesia Pethidine 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



No sources of funding were used to assist in the preparation of this review. The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this review.


  1. 1.
    Natural childbirth techniques [online]. Available from URL: [Accessed 2007 Oct 24]
  2. 2.
    Wikipedia. Anesthesia [online]. Available from URL: [Accessed 2007 Oct 24].
  3. 3.
    Yentis SM, Hirsch NP, Smith GB. Anaesthesia and intensive care A-Z: an encyclopaedia of principles and practice. 3rd ed. London: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, 2005Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lally JE, Murtagh MJ, Macphall S, et al. More in hope than expectation: a systematic review of women’s expectations and experience of pain relief in labour. BMC Med 2008; 6: 7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wee M. Analgesia in labour: inhalational and parenteral. Anaesth Intensive Care Med 2004; 5: 233–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sasada M, Smith S. Drugs in anaesthesia and intensive care. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Peck TE, Hill SA, Williams M. Pharmacology for anaesthesia and intensive care. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Aitkinhead AR, Rowbotham DJ, Smith G. Textbook of anaesthesia. 4th ed. London: Churchhill Livingstone, 2001Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bricker S. The anaesthesia science viva book. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carstoniu J, Levytam S, Norman P. Nitrous oxide in early labour: safety and analgesic efficacy assessed by a double blind, placebo-controlled study. Anesthesiology 1994; 80: 30–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Su F, Wei X, Chen X, et al. Clinical study on the efficacy and safety of labour analgesia with inhalation of nitrous oxide in oxygen. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi 2002; 37: 584–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Toscano A, Pancaro C, Giovannoni S, et al. Sevoflurane analgesia: a pilot study. Int J Obstet Anesth 2003; 12: 79–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yeo ST, Holdcroft A, Yentis SM, et al. Analgesia with sevoflurane during labour: I. Determination of the optimum concentration. Br J Anaesth 2007; 98: 105–9Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yeo ST, Holdcroft A, Yentis SM, et al. Analgesia with sevoflurane during labour: II. Sevoflurane compared with Entonox for labour analgesia. Br J Anaesth 2007; 98: 110–5Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yoo KY, Lee JC, Yoon MH. The effects of volatile anaesthetics on spontaneous contractility of isolated human pregnant uterine muscle: a comparison among sevoflurane, desflurane, isoflurane and halothane. Anesth Analg 2006; 103: 443–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yildiz K, Dogru K, Dalgic H, et al. Inhibitory effects of desflurane and sevoflurane on oxytocin induced contractions of isolated pregnant human myometrium. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2005; 49: 1355–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Olofsson C, Irestedt L. Traditional analgesic agents: are parenteral narcotics passe and do inhalational agents still have a place in labour? Baillieres Clin Obstet Gynaecol 1998; 12: 409–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yentis SM. Proposer: the use of Entonox for labour pain should be abandoned. Int J Obstet Anesth 2001; 10: 27–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Elbourne D, Wiseman RA. Types of intra-muscular opioids for maternal pain relief in labour. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000; (2): CD001237Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tuckey JP, Prout RE, Wee MY. Prescribing intramuscular opioids for labour analgesia in consultant-led maternity units: a survey of UK practice. Int J Obst Anesth 2008: 17; 3–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Saravanakumar K, Garstang JS, Hasan K. Intravenous patient-controlled analgesia for labour: a survey of UK practice. Int J Obst Anesth 2007; 16: 221–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fairlie FM, Marshall L, Walker JJ, et al. Intramuscular opioids for maternal pain relief in labour: a randomised control trial comparing pethidine with diamorphine. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1999; 106: 1181–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Osler M. A double blind study comparing meptaziniol and pethidine for pain relief in labour. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1987; 26: 15–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Morrison CE, Dutton D, Howie H, et al. Pethidine compared with meptazinol during labour: a prospective randomised double blind study in 1100 patients. Anaesthesia 1987; 42: 7–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    McInnes RJ, Hillan E, Clark D, et al. Diamorphine for pain relief in labour: a randomised controlled trial comparing intramuscular injection and patient-controlled analgesia. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2004; 111: 648–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Morley-Forster PK, Reid DW, Vandeberghe H. A comparison of patient-controlled analgesia fentanyl and alfentanil for labour analgesia. Can J Anaesth 2000; 47: 113–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Voilikas I, Butwick A, Wilkinson C, et al. Maternal and neonatal side effects of remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia in labour. Br J Anaesth 2005; 95: 504–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Roelants F, De Franceschi E, Veyckemans F, et al. Patient-controlled intravenous analgesia using remifentanil in the parturient. Can J Anaesth 2001; 48: 175–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Balki M, Kasodekar S, Dhumne S, et al. Remifentanil patient-controlled analgesia for labour: optimizing drug delivery regimens. Can J Anaesth 2007; 54: 626–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    McGrady E, Litchfield K. Epidural analgesia in labour. CEACCP 2004: 4; 114–7.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dickinson JE, Paech MJ, McDonald SJ, et al. Maternal satisfaction with childbirth and intrapartum analgesia in nulliparous labour. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2003; 43: 463–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Norman D, Winkelman C, Hanrahan E, et al. Labour epidural anaesthetics comparing loss of resistance to air versus saline; does the choice matter? AANA J 2006; 74: 301–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    D’ Angelo R, Berkebile BL, Gerancher JC. Prospective examination of epidural catheter insertion. Anesthesiology 1996; 84: 1524–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Beilin Y, Bernstein HH, Zucker-Pinchoff B. The optimal distance that a multiorifice epidural catheter should be threaded into the epidural space. Anesth Analg 1995; 81: 301–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Harding SA, Collis RE, Morgan BM. Meningitis after combined spinal-extradural anaesthesia in obstetrics. Br J Anaesth 1994; 73: 545–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Cascio M, Heath G. Meningitis following a combined spinal epidural technique in a labouring term parturient. Can J Anaesth 1996; 43: 399–402PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Collis RE, Davies DWL, Aveling W. Randomised comparison of combined spinal-epidural and standard epidural analgesia in labour. Lancet 1995; 345: 1413–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Purdie J, Reid J, Thorburn J, et al. Continuous extradural analgesia: comparison of midwife top-ups, continuous infusions and patient controlled administration. Br J Anaesth 1992; 68: 580–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Collis RE, Plaat FS, Morgan BM. Comparison of midwife top-ups, continuous infusion and patient-controlled epidural analgesia for maintaining mobility after a low-dose combined spinal-epidural. Br J Anaesth 1999; 82: 233–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Jones M, Dresner M. Long term audit of satisfaction with epidural analgesia. Int J Obstet Anesth 2002; 11 Suppl.: 31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Collis RE, Harding SA, Morgan BM. Effect of maternal ambulation on labour with low-dose combined spinal-epidural analgesia. Anaesthesia 1999; 54: 535–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wilson MJ, Cooper G, MacArthur C, et al. Comparative Obstetric Mobile Epidural Trial (COMET) Study Group UK. Anesthesiology 2002; 67: 1567–75Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Charlton JS, Dresner M, Freeman J. The role of motor block in patient satisfaction with epidural analgesia. Int J Obstet Anesth 2000; 9: 202Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Van der Vyver M, Halpern S, Joseph G. Patient-controlled epidural analgesia versus continuous infusion for labour analgesia: a meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth 2002; 89: 459–65PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AnaesthesiaLeeds General InfirmaryLeedsUK

Personalised recommendations