The administration of high‑level spinal anesthesia for cesarean section may lead to significant hemodynamic changes. Bioreactance‑based non‑invasive cardiac output monitoring (NICOM™) provides an accurate monitoring system for parturients under spinal anesthesia. The present study hypothesized that baseline hemodynamic parameters obtained via the NICOM™ system could serve as predictive indicators for post‑spinal anesthesia hypotension. Therefore, 80 full‑term parturients with singleton pregnancies who underwent scheduled cesarean section were enrolled and allocated to either a supine position group or a 15˚ left tilt group. All parturients received standard pre‑hydration with 750 ml of 0.9% saline. Baseline cardiac output index (CI), total peripheral resistance index (TPRI) and stroke volume (SV) were recorded using the NICOM™ system. Subsequently, spinal anesthesia with 2.4 ml of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine, 10 µg of fentanyl and 0.2 mg of morphine was administered. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and multivariate logistic regression were used to analyze the data. A total of 40 parturients (51.9%) developed hypotension. The areas under the ROC curves were 0.666, 0.594 and 0.622 for the CI, TPRI and SV, respectively. The optimal cut‑off value of the CI in predicting hypotension was 3.68 l/min/m² (ROC, sensitivity=85.0%, specificity=48.6%). Furthermore, CI was considered as an independent factor for post‑spinal anesthesia hypotension. In conclusion, the baseline CI obtained via the bioreactance‑based NICOM™ system may serve as a predictor of post‑spinal anesthesia hypotension in parturients regardless of patient position.

Background and Objectives: Local anesthetics administered via epidural catheters have evolved from intermittent top-ups to simultaneous administration of continuous epidural infusion (CEI) and patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) using the same device. The latest programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) model is believed to create a wider and more even distribution of analgesia inside the epidural space. The switch from CEI + PCEA to PIEB + PCEA in our department began in 2018; however, we received conflicting feedback regarding workload from the quality assurance team. This study aimed to investigate the benefits and drawbacks of this conversion, including the differences in acute pain service (APS) staff workload, maternal satisfaction, side effects, and complications before and after the changeover. Materials and Methods: Items from the APS records included total delivery time, average local anesthetic dosage, and the formerly mentioned items. The incidence of side effects, the association between the duration of delivery and total dosage, and hourly medication usage in the time subgroups of the CEI and PIEB groups were compared. The staff workload incurred from rescue bolus injection, catheter adjustment, and dosage adjustment was also analyzed. Results: The final analysis included 214 and 272 cases of CEI + PCEA and PIEB + PCEA for labor analgesia, respectively. The total amount of medication and average hourly dosage were significantly lower in the PIEB + PCEA group. The incidences of dosage change, manual bolus, extra visits per patient, and lidocaine use for rescue bolus were greater in the PIEB + PCEA group, indicating an increased staff workload. However, the two groups did not differ in CS rates, labor time, maternal satisfaction, and side effects. Conclusions: This study revealed that while PIEB + PCEA maintained the advantage of decreasing total drug doses, it inadvertently increased the staff burden. Increased workload might be a consideration in clinical settings when choosing between different methods of PCEA.