International journal of obstetric anesthesia最新文献

Background

Patient satisfaction and quality of recovery (QoR) are important patient-reported outcomes and quality metrics. The relationship between these two outcomes is complex, with studies showing a weak correlation between them in the non-obstetric population. We sought to evaluate the correlation between patient satisfaction and QoR scores in the obstetric population after caesarean delivery. As secondary aims, we aimed to determine the influence of urgency of procedure and mode of anaesthetic on patient satisfaction and QoR scores as well as determining drivers of satisfaction and dissatisfaction.

Methods

Women were invited to complete the Maternal Satisfaction Scale for Caesarean Section (MSCS) and Obstetric Quality of Recovery Score (ObsQoR-11) questionnaires at 24 h after caesarean delivery. Correlations were analysed using Spearman’s rank tests. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic content analysis.

Results

Data were collected from 300 women. There was a significant but weak positive correlation between ObsQoR-11 and MSCS scores (r = 0.31, P < 0.001). Correlation was significantly influenced by mode of anaesthesia (P < 0.001) and urgency of procedure (P = 0.005), with greater satisfaction amongst patients receiving spinal anaesthesia and those undergoing scheduled caesarean deliveries for a given QoR score. Quality of communication, interactions with staff and aspects of the postpartum physical environment were significant determinants of satisfaction and dissatisfaction.

Conclusion

Maternal satisfaction and obstetric QoR are distinct entities with a weak correlation between the two variables. Urgency of procedure and mode of anaesthesia are significant predictors of the correlation between satisfaction and quality of recovery scores. Many of the drivers of satisfaction were modifiable including quality of communication and a comfortable physical space for postpartum recovery.

Background

The dural puncture epidural (DPE) technique has been associated with better sacral analgesia compared with a traditional epidural (EPL) technique in laboring parturients. The aim of this study was to investigate whether DPE with a 27-gauge pencil-point needle compared with a traditional EPL technique produces more rapid bilateral sacral blockade in nulliparous parturients.

Methods

Patients were randomized to a DPE or EPL technique. Epidural analgesia in both groups was initiated with ropivacaine 0.1% and sufentanil 0.5 μg/mL (15 mL) and maintained via programmed intermittent epidural boluses. Analgesic blockade was tested bilaterally beginning 10 min after initiation, and then at predefined intervals until delivery. The presence of an S2 blockade at 20 min was the primary outcome.

Results

Among 108 (54 per group) patients enrolled, bilateral sacral (S2) blockade at 20 min was significantly more common in the DPE than in the EPL group [47 (87%) vs. 23 (43%), absolute risk reduction (ARR) 44%, 95% CI 28 to 60; P < 0.001]. Time to a numeric pain rating scale score (0–10 scale) ≤ 3 (20 [20,30] min in both groups, HR 1.15, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.15; P = 0.50), number of rescue doses [0 (0, 1) vs 0 (0, 1); P 0.08], and presence of bilateral S2 blockade at delivery were not significantly different between groups.

Conclusions

The DPE technique with a 27-gauge pencil-point spinal needle more often provides bilateral sacral blockade at 20 min following block initiation compared with the EPL technique. The time to adequate analgesia and need for supplemental analgesia did not appear to differ between techniques.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Background

Use of a programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) regimen during labour is associated with several benefits over a continuous epidural infusion (CEI), including reduced local anaesthetic consumption and reduced risk of motor block. We hypothesise that the benefits of a PIEB regimen may vary according to the Robson Ten Group Classification System (TGCS). The aim of this study was to determine if introduction of a PIEB regimen was associated with reduced incidence of motor block. We also wished to examine changes in obstetric outcomes following PIEB introduction across the Robson TGCS.

Methods

This was a single-centre retrospective cohort study. Data were collected over two three-month periods before and after PIEB introduction. The primary outcome was the incidence of motor block. Maternal and obstetric outcomes across Robson Groups 1–4 were analysed.

Results

Introduction of PIEB was associated with reduced incidence of motor block (28.4% (95% CI 25.7% to 31.3%) vs 22.4%, (95% CI 19.9% to 25.2%), difference 5.9% (95% CI 1.0% to 21.1%), P=0.003), with no association with changes in rates of caesarean section, operative vaginal delivery or other obstetric outcomes. Use of a PIEB regimen was associated with reduced incidence of motor block in Robson Group 4a (20.3% (16.0%, 28.0%) vs 12.0%, (7.6%, 16.4%), difference 9.9% (95% CI −17.4% to −2.4%) P=0.009). There were no significant changes in other outcomes assessed across Robson TGCS.

Conclusion

Introduction of PIEB for maintenance of labour analgesia was associated with reduced incidence of motor block in our institution compared with CEI. Presenting results according to Robson’s TGCS in future studies may allow better elucidation of the impact of neuraxial analgesia on maternal and obstetric outcomes.