Skip to main content
. 2004 Apr 19;2004(2):CD003765. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003765.pub2

Lertakyamanee 1999.

Methods Treatment allocation: 
 Women randomly assigned to receive spinal or epidural anaesthesia with random number table.
Allocation concealment: 
 No details given.
Documentation of exclusions: 
 No exclusions.
Blinding of outcome assessment: 
 No blinding of intraoperative outcomes ‐ "the attending anesthesiologist decided to give other treatment as clinically indicated".
Losses to follow up: 
 None.
Participants Inclusion criteria: 
 238 normal pregnancies at term scheduled to have elective or emergency caesarean sections during office hours.
Exclusion criteria: 
 Women with abruptio placenta, bleeding placenta praevia, fetal distress, diabetes mellitus, moderate to severe hypertension of pregnancy, severe cardiac or respiratory disease, multiple pregnancy, and coagulopathy.
Number lost to follow up: 
 None.
Interventions Spinal anaesthesia: 
 25 G spinal needle inserted at L3‐4. 1.2 ml 5% lignocaine injected.
Epidural anaesthesia: 
 Tuohy needle at L3‐4. 18‐20 ml of 2% lignocaine with adrenaline 1:200,000.
All patients received 1 litre of Ringer lactate as preload before the blocks were performed, and had a small pillow under the right buttock to prevent supine hypotension. Ephedrine was given if systolic blood pressure decreased more than 20% of baseline.
The attending anaesthetist "decided to give other treatment as clinically indicated, e.g., vasopressor, sedatives, intravenous fluid, blood, etc".
The randomised technique could be changed at the anaesthetist's consideration but the reasons why were specified.
Outcomes Number of women failing to achieve adequate anaesthesia to begin surgery and number of women requiring change of the anaesthetic technique during surgery were recorded, as well as reasons for the above.
Number of women who were satisfied with the anaesthetic technique was also recorded.
Number of women requiring treatment for hypotension was recorded.
Time taken from start of anaesthetic to start of surgery was recorded.
Neonates were assessed but no interventions were mentioned.
Notes Thailand.
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk B ‐ Unclear