Prenatal maternal stress is associated with delivery analgesia and unplanned cesareans

We tested the hypothesis that women with greater prenatal maternal stress (PNMS) would be more likely to receive intravenous opiates and epidural for delivery, and thereby increase the likelihood of unplanned cesarean delivery. PNMS was assessed during early, mid, and late pregnancy using psychometrically sound instruments in structured interviews with women receiving prenatal care at a public university clinic. Medical records were abstracted for analgesia during delivery, fetal heart tracing (FHT) abnormalities, and method of delivery. Only subjects attempting vaginal delivery (N = 298) were included. Using structural equation modeling, a PNMS variable was constructed from five indicators: pregnancy-specific distress, number of prenatal stressful life events, distress from life events, state anxiety, and perceived stress. After controlling for medical predictors of analgesia receipt and surgical delivery, women with higher PNMS were more likely to receive analgesia, and those who received analgesia were more likely to deliver surgically. Analgesia was also associated with FHT abnormalities, which in turn was associated with surgical delivery (all p's < 0.05). Women who received both an epidural and meperidine were most likely to have a cesarean delivery; 29% of this group delivered surgically. Results indicate that PNMS contributes to higher likelihood of unplanned cesarean delivery through its association with delivery analgesia.     

A randomized trial of intrapartum analgesia in women with severe preeclampsia

OBJECTIVE: To estimate whether the cesarean delivery rate differs between women with severe preeclampsia who receive intrapartum epidural analgesia versus patient-controlled intravenous opioid analgesia. METHODS: Women with severe preeclampsia at at least 24 weeks' gestation were randomly assigned to receive either intrapartum epidural (n = 56) versus patient-controlled intravenous opioid analgesia (n = 60), and each was administered by a standardized protocol. The sample size was selected to have 80% power to detect at least a 50% difference in the predicted intergroup cesarean delivery rates. Data were analyzed by intent to treat. RESULTS: Selected maternal characteristics and neonatal outcomes were similar in the two groups. The cesarean delivery rates in the epidural group (18%) and the patient-controlled analgesia group (12%) were similar (P =.35). Women who received epidural analgesia were more likely to require ephedrine for the treatment of hypotension (9% versus 0%, P =.02), but their infants were less likely to require naloxone at delivery (9% versus 54%, P <.001). Epidural analgesia provided significantly better pain relief as determined by a visual analogue intrapartum pain score (P <.001) and a postpartum pain management survey (P =.002). CONCLUSION: Compared with patient-controlled intravenous opioid analgesia, intrapartum epidural analgesia did not significantly increase the cesarean delivery rate in women with severe preeclampsia at our level III center, and it provided superior pain relief.     

Intra-partum epidural analgesia in grandmultiparous women

Objective. The present study aimed to characterise grandmultiparous women receiving intra-partum epidural analgesia and investigate associations between this method of pain relief and labour outcomes in grandmultiparas.

Methods. A population-based study was conducted comparing obstetric and perinatal characteristics of grandmultiparous women with and without epidural analgesia. Deliveries occurred during the years 1988–2006. Multiple logistic regression models were constructed to find independent risk factors associated with epidural analgesia, cesarean section and 1st stage labour dystocia.

Results. Out of 41,488 deliveries to grandmultiparous women included in the study, intra-partum epidural analgesia was utilised in 877 (2.1%). Multivariate analysis revealed that grandmultiparas who received epidural pain relief were significantly older and more likely to suffer from pre-mature rupture of the membranes, polyhydramnion, oligohydramnion, labour induction and a macrosomic fetus. After controlling for potential confounding, use of epidural analgesia remained an independent risk factor for 1st stage labour dystocia (odds ratio (OR) = 1.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.08–2.2) and cesarean delivery (OR = 2.9; 95% CI = 2.4–3.5) in grandmultiparas.

Conclusion. Grandmultiparous women who received intra-partum epidural analgesia have entirely different obstetric characteristics as compared with those who did not receive this method of pain relief. Although epidural use was demonstrated to be an independent risk factor for 1st stage labour dystocia and cesarean section in this population, residual confounding cannot be excluded.     

NO FREE LUNCH ON LABOR DAY: The Risks and Benefits of Epidural Analgesia During Labor*

Epidural analgesia provides effective pain relief for women during labor. However, like all medical interventions, it also has potential side effects such as longer labor and a higher rate of intrapartum fever and operative vaginal delivery. A recent meta-analysis of randomized studies by Halpern et al concluded there was no association between epidural use and cesarean delivery. A critique of that meta-analysis, included in this paper, concludes that there are currently insufficient data to determine whether epidural analgesia leads to increased rates of cesarean delivery. This paper also presents results from several recent studies related to epidural analgesia conducted at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston. One study demonstrates a significant influence of prenatal planning on use of epidural during labor. Additional studies examine the strong association of epidural analgesia with intrapartum fever and the consequences of that fever for mother and infant. Epidural analgesia should remain an option available to women during labor. A more complete understanding of the risks and benefits that accompany its use is essential so that women and their care providers can make informed choices about pain relief during labor. J Nurse Midwifery 1999;44:394–8 © 1999 by the American College of Nurse-Midwives.     

A Randomized Controlled Trial of Continuous Labor Support for Middle‐Class Couples: Effect on Cesarean Delivery Rates

ABSTRACT: Background: Previous randomized controlled studies in several different settings demonstrated the positive effects of continuous labor support by an experienced woman (doula) for low‐income women laboring without the support of family members. The objective of this randomized controlled trial was to examine the perinatal effects of doula support for nulliparous middle‐income women accompanied by a male partner during labor and delivery. Methods: Nulliparous women in the third trimester of an uncomplicated pregnancy were enrolled at childbirth education classes in Cleveland, Ohio, from 1988 through 1992. Of the 686 prenatal women recruited, 420 met enrollment criteria and completed the intervention. For the 224 women randomly assigned to the experimental group, a doula arrived shortly after hospital admission and remained throughout labor and delivery. Doula support included close physical proximity, touch, and eye contact with the laboring woman, and teaching, reassurance, and encouragement of the woman and her male partner. Results: The doula group had a significantly lower cesarean delivery rate than the control group (13.4% vs 25.0%, p = 0.002), and fewer women in the doula group received epidural analgesia (64.7% vs 76.0%, p = 0.008). Among women with induced labor, those supported by a doula had a lower rate of cesarean delivery than those in the control group (12.5% vs 58.8%, p = 0.007). On questionnaires the day after delivery, 100 percent of couples with doula support rated their experience with the doula positively. Conclusions: For middle‐class women laboring with the support of their male partner, the continuous presence of a doula during labor significantly decreased the likelihood of cesarean delivery and reduced the need for epidural analgesia. Women and their male partners were unequivocal in their positive opinions about laboring with the support of a doula. (BIRTH 35:2 June 2008)     

No free lunch on labor day. The risks and benefits of epidural analgesia during labor.

Epidural analgesia provides effective pain relief for women during labor. However, like all medical interventions, it also has potential side effects such as longer labor and a higher rate of intrapartum fever and operative vaginal delivery. A recent meta-analysis of randomized studies by Halpern et al concluded there was no association between epidural use and cesarean delivery. A critique of that meta-analysis, included in this paper, concludes that there are currently insufficient data to determine whether epidural analgesia leads to increased rates of cesarean delivery. This paper also presents results from several recent studies related to epidural analgesia conducted at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston. One study demonstrates a significant influence of prenatal planning on use of epidural during labor. Additional studies examine the strong association of epidural analgesia with intrapartum fever and the consequences of that fever for mother and infant. Epidural analgesia should remain an option available to women during labor. A more complete understanding of the risks and benefits that accompany its use is essential so that women and their care providers can make informed choices about pain relief during labor.     

Nulliparas' Preferences for Epidural Analgesia: Their Effects on Actual Use in Labor

Background: Few studies have directly examined the reasons for choices of pain relief during labor. The purpose of this study was to investigate if women's preferences for epidural analgesia in labor have an impact on the use of intrapartum epidural analgesia. Methods: Nulliparous women attending childbirth classes completed questionnaires about their antenatal preferences for the use of intrapartum epidural analgesia. Data on actual use of analgesia was obtained by chart review. The analysis included 303 women with either spontaneous or induced labor at term. Results: The 185 women who planned to receive epidural analgesia had a markedly higher rate of epidural use (91%) than the 110 women who hoped to avoid it (57%) ( p= 0.001). Of 237 epidurals administered, 169 (71%) were planned during the antenatal period. Among women receiving epidural analgesia, those planning to receive it tended to have more frequent early administration (≤ 3 cm cervical dilation) than women who unsuccessfully tried to avoid epidural use (54% vs. 24%, p= 0.003). Conclusion: In our population of nulliparas, a woman's antenatal plan to receive epidural analgesia is strongly associated with her likelihood of receiving it. Women who plan to receive epidural analgesia have earlier administration.     

Nulliparous active labor, epidural analgesia, and cesarean delivery for dystocia

OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to examine the effect of epidural analgesia on dystocia-related cesarean delivery in actively laboring nulliparous women.STUDY DESIGN: Active labor was confirmed in nulliparous women by uterine contractions, cervical dilatation of 4 cm, effacement of 80%, and fetopelvic engagement. Patients were randomized to one of two groups: epidural analgesia or narcotics. A strict protocol for labor management was in place. Patients recorded the level of pain at randomization and at hourly intervals on a visual analog scale. Elective outlet operative vaginal delivery was permitted.RESULTS: One hundred women were randomized. No difference in the rate of cesarean delivery for dystocia was noted between the groups (epidural 8%, narcotic 6%; p = 0.71). No significant differences were noted in the lengths of the first (p = 0.54) or second (p = 0.55) stages of labor or in any other time variable. Women with epidural analgesia underwent operative vaginal delivery more frequently (p = 0.004). Pain scores were equivalent at randomization, but large differences existed at each hour thereafter. The number of patients randomized did not achieve prestudy estimates. A planned interim analysis of the results demonstrated that we were unlikely to find a statistically significant difference in cesarean delivery rates in a trial of reasonable duration.CONCLUSIONS: With strict criteria for the diagnosis of labor and with use of a rigid protocol for labor management, there was no increase in dystocia-related cesarean delivery with epidural analgesia.(Am J Obstet Gynecol 1997;177:1465-70.)     

蛛网膜下腔-硬膜外联合阻滞麻醉用于分娩镇痛206例分析

目的　探讨分娩镇痛的效果及对产程、母婴状况的影响。方法　采用蛛网膜下腔 -硬膜外联合阻滞(CSEA)用于分娩镇痛的产妇 2 0 6例作为观察组 ,将未采用任何分娩镇痛药物而进入产程的产妇 2 0 6例作为对照组 ,分别观察产程时间、分娩方式、产后出血、胎儿窘迫及新生儿窒息情况。结果　两组产程活跃期比较 ,有极显著性差异 (P <0 0 1) ;两组分娩方式比较有显著性差异 (P <0 0 5 ) ;两组胎儿窘迫、新生儿窒息及产后出血发生率比较 ,无显著性差异 (P >0 0 5 )。结论　CSEA用于分娩镇痛 ,疼痛阻滞完善 ,加速了产程活跃期及第二产程的进展 ,降低了剖宫产及阴道难产率 ,对母婴均无不良影响     

Mothers' satisfaction with planned vaginal and planned cesarean birth

We sought to describe maternal satisfaction with childbirth among women planning either cesarean or vaginal birth. We enrolled primiparous women planning cesarean birth and a comparison group planning vaginal birth. After delivery, the maternal subjective experience was assessed with a visual analogue satisfaction scale and the Salmon questionnaire, with scale scores for these aspects of the maternal experience of birth: fulfillment, distress, and difficulty. The sample included 160 women planning vaginal birth and 44 women planning cesarean. Eight weeks postpartum, women planning cesarean reported higher satisfaction ratings ( P = 0.023), higher scores for fulfillment ( P = 0.017), lower scores for distress ( P = 0.010), and lower scores for difficulty ( P < 0.001). The least favorable scores were associated with unplanned cesarean ( N = 48). Women planning cesarean reported a more favorable birth experience than women planning vaginal birth, due in part to low satisfaction associated with unplanned cesarean. Maternal satisfaction with childbirth may be improved by efforts to reduce unplanned cesarean, but also by support for maternal-choice cesarean.     

The effect of a rapid change in availability of epidural analgesia on the cesarean delivery rate: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to quantitatively estimate the effect of a rapid introduction or withdrawal of on-demand epidural analgesia on the cesarean delivery rate. STUDY DESIGN: MEDLINE and meeting abstracts were searched for studies reporting the cesarean delivery rate immediately before and after a rapid change in the availability of epidural analgesia. Nine studies reporting data on 37,753 patients were selected. Meta-analysis was performed to estimate the means and 95% confidence intervals for the changes in rates of total cesarean deliveries, cesarean deliveries among nulliparous women, cesarean deliveries for dystocia, and operative vaginal deliveries. RESULTS: There was no significant change in the overall cesarean delivery rate with an increase in the availability of epidural analgesia. Similarly, the rates of cesarean deliveries among nulliparous patients, of cesarean deliveries for dystocia, and of operative vaginal deliveries did not significantly differ between periods of high and low epidural analgesia availability. CONCLUSION: A rapid change in the availability of epidural analgesia is not associated with any increase in the cesarean delivery rate.     

Ethnic disparity in the success of vaginal birth after cesarean delivery

Objective.?To estimate whether maternal race/ethnicity is independently associated with successful vaginal birth after cesarean delivery (VBAC).

Study design.?A retrospective cohort study from January 1, 1997 to July 30, 2002 of women with singleton pregnancies and a previous cesarean delivery. The odds ratio (OR) for successful VBAC as a function of ethnicity was corrected for age >35 years, parity, weight gain, diabetes mellitus, hospital site, prenatal care provider, gestational age, induction, labor augmentation, epidural analgesia, and birth weight >4000 g.

Results.?Among 54 146 births, 8030 (14.8%) occurred in women with previous cesarean deliveries. The trials of labor rates were similar among Caucasian (46.6%), Hispanic (45.4%), and African American (46.0%) women. However, there was a significant difference among ethnic groups for VBAC success rates (79.3% vs. 79.3% vs. 70.0%, respectively). When compared to Caucasian women, the adjusted OR for VBAC success was 0.37 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27–0.50) for African American women and 0.63 (95% CI 0.51–0.79) for Hispanic women.

Conclusion.?African American and Hispanic women are significantly less likely than Caucasian women to achieve successful VBAC.     

The effect of delayed pushing in the second stage of labor with continuous lumbar epidural analgesia

We studied primigravid women in spontaneous labor at term and given epidural analgesia. Two hundred such women giving birth in 1983 were compared with similar groups who gave birth in 1985 and 1987 after the introduction of 'delayed pushing' into our labor ward protocol. Four hundred controls were obtained in 1983 and 1985 by selecting from the labor ward register the next normal primigravid woman in spontaneous labor without epidural analgesia. The assisted delivery rate was significantly higher in all three epidural groups than in the controls (p less than 0.001). Among epidural labors, there was no significant difference between 1983 and 1987 in the incidence of rotational or non-rotational forceps, or of cesarean section. In each epidural group, women who waited more than 60 min were less likely to experience a normal spontaneous delivery than were those who did not (p less than 0.001 in 1983; p = 0.006 in 1985 p = 0.035 in 1987). We conclude that to delay pushing beyond 60 min confers no benefit regarding mode of delivery.     

Epidural analgesia and the course of delivery in term primiparas

OBJECTIVES: Epidural analgesia provides the most effective pain control during labor. Of great concern is its influence on the course of delivery and perinatal complications. DESIGN: The aim of the study was to assess the effect of epidural analgesia on the course of delivery and perinatal outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 609 deliveries among 1334 (323 women with epidural analgesia (53%) and 548 without epidural analgesia (47%)) met the following criteria: primipara, singleton, live pregnancy, > =37 weeks' gestation, cephalic presentation of a fetus, lack of contraindication for vaginal delivery. The incidence of instrumental deliveries and fetal distress, duration of the first, second and third stage of labor, perinatal outcome, perinatal complications and perinatal blood loss and were analyzed. RESULTS: The incidence of fetal distress during second stage of labor was significantly higher in the epidural group (12.69 vs. 6.99%, P=0.02). The incidence of fetal distress during first stage of labor did not differ in both groups (10.53% vs. 8.74%, NS). Cesarean sections rate was similar in epidural and non-epidural group (17.7 vs. 18.2%, NS). Among vaginal deliveries duration of the first and second stage of labor was longer in epidural group (6.5+/-2.4 vs. 5.4+/-2.5 godz., P=0,000003 and 47.3+/-34.8 vs. 29.1+/-25.8 min., P=0.000003) and this was independent of period of time between onset of first stage of labor and epidural analgesia. Oxitocin use was significantly more frequent in the epidural group (20.6 vs. 10.3%, P<0.004). There were no statistically significant differences in the rates of instrumental vaginal deliveries, 1 and 5-minute Apgar scores, length of third stage of labor and perinatal blood loss in patients with and without epidural analgesia. Perinatal outcome did not depend on previous use of epidural analgesia or mode of analgesia for the operation in cesarean section subgroup. CONCLUSION: Epidural labor analgesia is associated with slower progress of labor but has no adverse effect on perinatal outcome and perinatal complications.     

Effect of epidural analgesia on the primary cesarean rate

There is some concern that providing parturients with epidural analgesia increases the likelihood of cesarean delivery. Because of the widespread interest in cesarean rates and the expanding use of epidural analgesia, we believed that this contention should be assessed. Hospital records were reviewed to determine the primary cesarean rate for 1084 parturients who delivered at our institution during 15 months in which there was a 24-hour "on demand" epidural service. This was compared with our primary cesarean rate during 15 months in which epidural analgesia was not available, even on physician request. Because of the characteristics of our institution, this control group consisted of patients from the same population base managed by the same eight obstetricians using the same management techniques. For patients in labor, the primary cesarean rate overall was 9.0% before and 8.2% after the epidural service began (P = .626). When subpopulations based on parity and indication for cesarean delivery were studied, there were no significant changes in the cesarean rate. These results demonstrate that the availability of on-demand epidural analgesia for patients in labor did not increase the primary cesarean rate, either in the aggregate or for any of the subpopulations studied.     

Factors Associated with the Choice of Delivery without Epidural Analgesia in Women at Low Risk in France

ABSTRACT: Background: Regional anesthesia is used for three‐fourths of the deliveries in France. Epidural analgesia during labor is supposed to be available to all women at low risk. The purpose of our study was to examine how the choice of delivery without an epidural varied in this context according to women’s characteristics, prenatal care, and type of maternity unit. Methods: The 2003 National Perinatal Survey in France collected data about a representative sample of births. We selected 8,233 women who were at low risk and therefore should have been able to choose whether or not to deliver without epidural analgesia. Women were interviewed in the maternity unit after delivery. The factors associated with women’s choice to deliver without epidural analgesia were studied with multivariable analyses. Results: Of the 2,720 women who gave birth without epidural analgesia, 37 percent reported that they had not wanted one; other reasons were labor occurring too quickly (43.9%), medical contraindication (3.3%), and unavailability of an anesthesiologist (2.8%). The reported decision to deliver without epidural analgesia was closely associated with high parity. It was also more frequent among women in an unfavorable social situation (not cohabiting, no or low‐qualified job) and among women who gave birth in nonuniversity public hospitals, in small‐ or medium‐sized maternity units, and in maternity units without an anesthesiologist always on site. Conclusions: Unfavorable social situation and organizational factors are associated with the reported choice to give birth without epidural analgesia. This finding suggests that women are not always in a position to make a real choice. It would be useful to improve the understanding of how pregnant women define their preferences and to know how these preferences change during pregnancy and labor. (BIRTH 35:3 September 2008)     

Effect of epidural analgesia on the primary cesarean section and forceps delivery rates

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of introducing epidural analgesia for labor pain relief on the primary cesarean and forceps delivery rates. STUDY DESIGN: The control group consisted of 1,720 women who delivered on a charity hospital service between September 1, 1992, and August 31, 1993; epidural analgesia was not available for this cohort of patients. The study group consisted of 1,442 patients who delivered on the same service between September 1, 1993, and August 31, 1994; elective epidural analgesia for labor pain relief was available for this cohort of patients. A computerized obstetric database was analyzed to compare the two groups regarding demographics, parity, pregnancy complications, labor characteristics, type of delivery, low birth weight incidence and five-minute Apgar scores. RESULTS: The two groups were similar with respect to demographics and pregnancy complications. No control group patient received epidural analgesia for labor pain relief; 734 of 1,285 (57%) laboring patients in the study group elected epidural analgesia for pain relief. The primary cesarean delivery rate for the control group was 9.6% and for the study group 11.0% (not statistically significant). The control group had 34 (2.0%) forceps deliveries and the study group, 88 (6.1%), for a statistically significant difference. There were significantly more vaginal births after cesarean in the study group (42 vs. 26). CONCLUSION: Epidural analgesia was not associated with an increase in the primary cesarean delivery rate but was associated with an increase in the operative vaginal delivery rate.     

Neonatal Outcome after Trial of Labor Compared with Elective Repeat Cesarean Section

ABSTRACT: Background: Trial of labor after cesarean section has been an important strategy for lowering the rate of cesarean delivery in the United States, but concerns regarding its safety remain. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of newborns delivered by elective repeat cesarean section compared to delivery following a trial of labor after cesarean. Methods: All low‐risk mothers with 1 or 2 previous cesareans and no prior vaginal deliveries, who delivered at our institution from December 1994 through July 1995, were identified. Neonatal outcomes were compared between 136 women who delivered by elective repeat cesarean section and 313 women who delivered after a trial of labor. To investigate reasons for differences in outcome between these groups, neonatal outcomes within the trial of labor group were then compared between those mothers who had received epidural analgesia (n = 230) and those who did not (n = 83). Results: Infants delivered after a trial of labor had increased rates of sepsis evaluation (23.3% vs 12.5%, p = 0.008); antibiotic treatment (11.5% vs 4.4%, p = 0.02); intubation to evaluate for the presence of meconium below the cords (11.5% vs 1.5%, p < 0.001); and mild bruising (8.0% vs 1.5%, p = 0.008). Within the trial of labor group, infants of mothers who received epidural analgesia were more likely to have received diagnostic tests and therapeutic interventions including sepsis evaluation (29.6% vs 6.0%, p = 0.001) and antibiotic treatment (13.9% vs 4.8%, p = 0.03) than within the no‐epidural analgesia group. Conclusions: Infants born to mothers after a trial of labor are twice as likely to undergo diagnostic tests and therapeutic interventions than infants born after an elective repeat cesarean section, but the increase occurred only in the subgroup of infants whose mothers received epidural analgesia for pain relief during labor. The higher rate of intervention could relate to the well‐documented increase in intrapartum fever that occurs with epidural use. (BIRTH 30:2 June 2003)     

Epidural Analgesia in Labor: An Evaluation of Risks and Benefits

Background: Intrapartum epidural analgesia has become increasingly popular because it is the most effective method of providing pain relief during labor. Much attention is given to its safety and efficacy, and many health care providers and consumers are unaware of its potential drawbacks. This article reviews the literature about the effects of epidural analgesia on the mother and infant. Methods: We performed a computer-assisted MEDLINE search for articles and a review of bibliographies from articles on epidural analgesia. When reported data were incomplete, authors were contacted for more detailed information. Results: The most common procedure-related complications, hypotension, inadvertent dural puncture, and headache, are easily treated and usually self-limited. Permanent morbidity and mortality are rare. Retrospective studies and randomized controlled trials both demonstrate that epidural analgesia is associated with increases in duration of labor, instrument vaginal delivery, and cesarean birth. To date only three trials randomized patients to narcotic versus epidural groups, and all showed a twofold to threefold increase in cesarean section for dystocia. Limiting epidural use in nulliparous labor and delaying its placement until after 5 cm of cervical dilation may reduce the risk of operative intervention for dystocia. Epidural analgesia may also increase intervention for fetal distress. Several studies show its association with maternal fever in labor. Its association with chronic back pain, neonatal behavioral changes, and maternal-infant bonding are more tenuous and require further study. Conclusions: Epidural analgesia is a safe and effective method of relieving pain in labor, but is associated with longer labor, more operative intervention, and increases in cost. It must remain an option; however, caregivers and consumers should be aware of associated risks. Women should be counseled about these risks and other pain-relieving options before the duress of labor.     

Mode of Delivery after Epidural Analgesia in a Cohort of Low‐Risk Nulliparas

Abstract: Background: Although epidural analgesia is widespread and very effective for alleviating labor pain, its use is still controversial, as the literature is inconsistent about the risk of adverse birth outcome after administration of epidural analgesia. The aim of this study was to explore associations between epidural analgesia and mode of delivery. Methods: Data were obtained from a prospective cohort from nine Danish labor wards and comprised 2,721 term nulliparous women with spontaneous onset of labor and a singleton fetus in cephalic presentation. Information about epidural analgesia, mode of delivery, and birth complications was obtained by the staff attending labor. Additional information was provided from self‐administered questionnaires in gestational week 37. Multiple logistic regression analyses were used to estimate the association between epidural analgesia and birth outcomes. Results are presented as crude and adjusted odds ratios (OR [95% CI]). Results: Of the total cohort, 21.6 percent required epidural analgesia, 8.7 percent had emergency cesarean section, and 14.9 percent had vacuum extraction. Women with epidural analgesia had a higher risk of emergency cesarean section (adjusted OR: 5.8; 95% CI: 4.1–8.1), and vacuum extraction (adjusted OR: 1.7; 95% CI: 1.3–2.2). In a subgroup of the cohort with a very low overall risk of cesarean section, 3.4 percent had emergency cesarean section and an increased risk of emergency cesarean section was also found in this group (adjusted OR: 3.5; 95% CI: 1.5–8.2). Conclusions: In nulliparous women of a very low‐risk population, use of epidural analgesia for labor pain was associated with higher risks of emergency cesarean section and vacuum extraction. (BIRTH 38:4 December 2011)