Comparison of different interventions for the reduction of labor pain: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

This systematic review and network meta-analysis were performed to compare different interventions for the reduction of labor pain.

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science and ScienceDirect databases were searched for the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) meeting prespecified inclusion criteria up to January, 2023. Interventions including electrical acupoint stimulation (TEAS), epidural analgesia (EA) and control treatments. The primary outcomes included pain scores, failure rate of natural delivery, adverse events and Apgar scores. The methodological quality was assessed by the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Meta-analysis was performed by R software with gemtc package. Surfaces under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA) were used to rank the intervention.

Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the network meta-analysis. TEAS (WMD -3.1, 95% CrI -3.8, -2.5) and EA (WMD -2.1, 95% CrI -2.8, -1.3) was more effective than the control in decreasing VAS. TEAS ranked first (SUCRA, 90.9%), EA ranked second (SUCRA, 74.0%) and control ranked last (SUCRA, 35.0%) for reducing VAS. For patients with labor pain, with respect to the most effective treatment for reducing failure rate of natural delivery, TEAS ranked first (SUCRA, 96.6%), EA ranked second (SUCRA, 50.4%) and control ranked last (SUCRA, 3.0%). With regard to the Apgar scores, there was high probability that TEAS ranked first (SUCRA, 80.7%), compared to control (SUCRA, 41.4%) and EA (SUCRA 27.9%). With regard to the adverse events, there was high probability that TEAS ranked first (SUCRA, 99.9%), compared to control (SUCRA, 33.2%) and EA (SUCRA 17.6%).

TEAS has the potential to serve as a viable alternative for women in labor, offering a simple, noninvasive, and non-pharmacological intervention that surpasses EA in terms of both analgesic effectiveness and safety for both mothers and neonates.