V A Eley1, K Donovan2, E Walters2, R Brijball2, D S Eley3. 1. Department of Anaesthesia, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston, Queensland, Australia; School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Herston, Queensland, Australia. Electronic address: victoria_eley@health.qld.gov.au. 2. Department of Anaesthesia, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston, Queensland, Australia; School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Herston, Queensland, Australia. 3. School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Herston, Queensland, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Obese parturients are recognised as high risk and an antenatal anaesthetic consultation is recommended. The potential positive and negative effects of this consultation have not been investigated. This prospective observational study aimed to determine if antenatal anaesthetic consultation affects decisional conflict, anxiety scores or risk perception in obese women planning vaginal delivery. METHODS: Eligible women had a body mass index of > or = 35 kg/m2, planning a vaginal delivery, aged > or = 18 years and able to complete a questionnaire presented in English. Before their anaesthetic consultation, women completed a written decisional conflict questionnaire, the Six-Point Short Form of the Speilberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory and two questions regarding risk perception. All questions were repeated by telephone consultation two weeks later. Independent samples t-tests were used to detect differences between pre and post-test scores. RESULTS: Of 114 women recruited, 89 completed the protocol and were analysed. Women had a mean ±SD age of 29.4±5.2 years and body mass index of 43.6±5.6 kg/m2. Decisional conflict scores were significantly lower after the consultation (30.04 vs. 16.54, P<0.001). Anxiety scores were lower (9.41 vs. 8.49, P=0.002) but this was not clinically significant. Only 19.1% of women felt their health was at risk in pregnancy; this did not change after the consultation. Thirteen women changed their preference toward epidural analgesia (P=0.01). DISCUSSION: Our results support the current practice of referral of obese parturients for anaesthetic consultation, but demonstrate that most women remain unaware of the risks of obesity in pregnancy despite anaesthetic consultation.
BACKGROUND:Obese parturients are recognised as high risk and an antenatal anaesthetic consultation is recommended. The potential positive and negative effects of this consultation have not been investigated. This prospective observational study aimed to determine if antenatal anaesthetic consultation affects decisional conflict, anxiety scores or risk perception in obesewomen planning vaginal delivery. METHODS: Eligible women had a body mass index of > or = 35 kg/m2, planning a vaginal delivery, aged > or = 18 years and able to complete a questionnaire presented in English. Before their anaesthetic consultation, women completed a written decisional conflict questionnaire, the Six-Point Short Form of the Speilberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory and two questions regarding risk perception. All questions were repeated by telephone consultation two weeks later. Independent samples t-tests were used to detect differences between pre and post-test scores. RESULTS: Of 114 women recruited, 89 completed the protocol and were analysed. Women had a mean ±SD age of 29.4±5.2 years and body mass index of 43.6±5.6 kg/m2. Decisional conflict scores were significantly lower after the consultation (30.04 vs. 16.54, P<0.001). Anxiety scores were lower (9.41 vs. 8.49, P=0.002) but this was not clinically significant. Only 19.1% of women felt their health was at risk in pregnancy; this did not change after the consultation. Thirteen women changed their preference toward epidural analgesia (P=0.01). DISCUSSION: Our results support the current practice of referral of obese parturients for anaesthetic consultation, but demonstrate that most women remain unaware of the risks of obesity in pregnancy despite anaesthetic consultation.
Authors: Carolyn F Weiniger; Sharon Einav; Uriel Elchalal; Vladislav Ozerski; Daniel Shatalin; Alexander Ioscovich; Yehuda Ginosar Journal: Isr J Health Policy Res Date: 2018-03-19