Comparison of Two Routes of Administration of a Multimodal Analgesic Protocol in Postoperative Cesarean Section Oral vs Intravenous

Pain after cesarean section (CS), usually described as strong, is an obstacle to good mother-child interaction and post-operative rehabilitation. Its management is important for a quick recovery and allow the mother to take care and link with her newborn. Currently, intrathecal opioids are the most commonly used technique and provide the foundation for post-cesarean analgesia. This technique combined with multimodal analgesia reduces the doses of morphine consumed, including these side effects. Spinal anesthesia is the standard anesthetic technique for caesarean section; it offers several advantages including the possibility of prescribing oral analgesics. An ideal analgesic protocol is one that is simple to implement, cost-effective, and has minimal impact on the work staff. It would have a good safety profile, a low incidence of side effects and complications, and respond to wide inter-patient variability. It relieves the mother of high quality pain while having minimal interference with her, newborn care and anesthesia while allowing safe breastfeeding.

The aim of this work is to compare the quality of an multimodal oral analgesia with intravenous analgesia and to demonstrate non-inferiority of the oral route pain relieve in postoperative caesarean section period. The secondary objectives was to evaluate the maternal tolerance of the drugs (piroxicam, nefopam, paracetamol) used postoperatively of a caesarean section.