PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “ANESTHESIA, OBSTETRICAL”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1993

Guidelines for Regional Anesthesia in Obstetrics: potential impact on obstetric anesthesia services in rural Alabama.

When the American Society of Anesthesiologists published its Guidelines for Regional Anesthesia in Obstetrics, I did a survey to determine what impact a broadly implemented strict interpretation of those guidelines might have on obstetric anesthesia care in small rural Alabama hospitals. Thirty-six rural Alabama hospitals with fewer than 200 beds were included in the survey, with a response rate of 50%. Data included total deliveries, cesarean section rates, utilization rates of anesthesia services, personnel providing anesthesia care, and identification of physician personnel available during labor and cesarean section. Results showed that anesthesia care is provided for approximately 52% of births in the responding hospitals. Of these, approximately 60% of cesarean sections and 90% of vaginal deliveries are not routinely attended by anesthesiologists. If these data also reflect the nonrespondent hospitals, statewide access could be limited for approximately 6000 parturients annually. The Guidelines should be interpreted with caution. Rather than conform to related policies, interpretation should allow implementation consistent with the capabilities of the individual institutions, while ensuring quality anesthesia care for the parturients.

Alabama↗
PubMed1996

Information and concerns about obstetric anesthesia: a survey of 320 obstetric patients.

This study was undertaken to assess women's knowledge and concerns about obstetric anesthesia and to determine if they perceive a need for an anesthesia interview before the onset of labor. A 17 item questionnaire was distributed to 407 women on postpartum day one. The women were questioned about their knowledge, anxiety and concerns regarding obstetric anesthesia. The questionnaire was completed by 320 women, 57% of whom were Caucasian and 28% of whom had some postgraduate education. Most of the women (74%) had either a regional or general anesthetic for their delivery and 86% of the women admitted to having some anxiety about anesthesia. Although 82% of the women attempted to obtain information about anesthesia before labor, 28% did not feel adequately informed. The majority (59%) of the women would have wanted a preoperative visit with an anesthesiologist before labor. These results illustrate that most women are anxious about obstetric anesthesia and do not feel adequately prepared. Efforts at educating women about obstetric anesthesia would be welcomed by them and methods to accomplish this goal are discussed.

Journal Article↗
PubMed2006

[Ephedrine as alternative to Akrinor in regional obstetric anesthesia].

Hypotension in anesthesia and obstetric anesthesia in particular, is a widespread problem. After the temporary withdrawal of Akrinor from the market, the internationally available drug ephedrine is available for prevention and therapy of hypotension in anesthesia and its effect is comparable with Akrinor. In obstetric epidural anesthesia the intravenous prophylactic drug application of ephedrine seems to be superior to therapeutic application only. The aim of this overview is to show alternatives to the currently administered catecholamines for prevention of hypotension in obstetric anesthesia.

Acidosis↗
PubMed1997

Obstetric anesthesia work force survey, 1981 versus 1992.

BACKGROUND: In 1981, with support from the American Society of Anesthesiologists and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, anesthesia and obstetric providers were surveyed to identify the personnel and methods used to provide obstetric anesthesia in the United States. The survey was expanded and repeated in 1992 with support from the same organizations. METHODS: Comments and questions from the American Society of Anesthesiologists Committee on Obstetrical Anesthesia and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Obstetric Practice were added to the original survey instrument to include newer issues while allowing comparison with data from 1981. Using the American Hospital Association registry of hospitals, hospitals were differentiated by number of births per year (stratum I, > or = 1,500 births; stratum II, 500-1,499 births; stratum III, < 500 births) and by U.S. census region. A stratified random sample of hospitals was selected. Two copies of the survey were sent to the administrator of each hospital, one for the chief of obstetrics and one for the chief of anesthesiology. RESULTS: Compared with 1981 data, there was an overall reduction in the number of hospitals providing obstetric care (from 4,163 to 3,545), with the decrease occurring in the smallest units (56% of stratum III hospitals in 1981 compared with 45% in 1992). More women received some type of labor analgesia and there was a 100% increase in the use of epidural analgesia. However, regional analgesia was unavailable in 20% of the smallest hospitals. Spinal analgesia for labor was used in 4% of parturients. In 1981, obstetricians provided 30% of epidural analgesia for labor; they provided only 2% in 1992. Regional anesthesia was used for 78-85% (depending on strata) of patients undergoing cesarean section, resulting in a marked decrease in the use of general anesthesia. Anesthesia for cesarean section was provided by nurse anesthetists without the medical direction of an anesthesiologist in only 4% of stratum I hospitals but in 59% of stratum III hospitals. Anesthesia personnel provided neonatal resuscitation in 10% of cesarean deliveries compared with 23% in 1981. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with 1981, analgesia is more often used by parturients during labor, and general anesthesia is used less often in patients having cesarean section deliveries. In the smallest hospitals, regional analgesia for labor is still unavailable to many parturients, and more than one half of anesthetics for cesarean section are provided by nurse anesthetists without medical direction by an anesthesiologist. Obstetricians are less likely to personally provide epidural analgesia for their patients. Anesthesia personnel are less involved in newborn resuscitation.

Anesthesia, Obstetrical↗
PubMed1998

[Sevoflurane in obstetric anesthesia].

In obstetrics, general anaesthesia is increasingly being replaced by peridural anaesthesia. The cases where general anaesthesia is still used are those involving increased risk. It is therefore not surprising that, for example, maternal mortality in cases of caesarian section under general anaesthesia has not decreased. Indeed, large-scale statistical analyses in the USA and the UK show an increase in relative risk. For this reason, continuing efforts have to be made to improve obstetric general anaesthesia. Inhalational anaesthetics have an important role to play, as they represent the only acceptable compromise between the dangers of maternal awareness and neonatal depression. We used literature data and our own experience of urgent caesarian sections to investigate whether the new inhalational anaesthetic sevoflurane is suitable for this purpose. In a comparison of sevoflurane and peridural anaesthesia, there was no difference in outcome for the child and the maternal results showed only the expected procedure-specific differences in circulatory parameters and early postoperative analgesia requirement. A second study involving continuous pEEG monitoring (SEF90) showed advantages of sevoflurane over isoflurane in the initial phase of surgery and in the recovery phase. However, the value of sevoflurane in obstetric anaesthesia will have to be confirmed in more extensive studies.

Anesthesia, Epidural↗
PubMed1987

[Opinion of mothers on continuous peridural obstetrical anesthesia].

The general opinion on epidural anesthesia in obstetrics may be adversely affected by recent public controversies about the mother's situation during childbirth in hospital, which nowadays is often considered to be a highly technological, impersonal, or "unnatural" procedure. This assumption led us to conduct an inquiry on maternal assessment of obstetric epidural anesthesia and its relation to the clinical and social history. The study included 113 parturients, who received epidural anesthesia (on-demand epidural injections of bupivacaine 0.25%) for vaginal delivery. Mothers were asked to answer certain questions about this regimen (e.g. analgetic efficacy; difficulties in deciding on this method; recommendations to other parturients; opinion of the role of epidural anesthesia in obstetrics; choice of analgesic regimen for future childbirth) 1 day after delivery and 2 months later. Additional social and historical factors (e.g. education; profession; family status; preceding pregnancy, childbirth or abortion; complications during pregnancy or childbirth; duration of parturition) were used to reveal relevant statistical correlations. Sixty-five percent of the patients considered pain relief by epidural anesthesia as "good" or even "very good" during the first inquiry immediately after childbirth. Women who had undergone prior interruptions of pregnancy were less satisfied, probably because of their rather ambiguous attitude towards motherhood. With regard to the choice of analgesic regimen for future childbirth (50% of the patients had made a definite decision to have epidural anesthesia under this condition), those women were especially reserved who had suffered from complications during pregnancy and disapproved of it in the future.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Anesthesia, Epidural↗