Literature DB >> 9232144

Obstetric anesthesia work force survey, 1981 versus 1992.

J L Hawkins1, C P Gibbs, M Orleans, G Martin-Salvaj, B Beaty.   

Abstract

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.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9232144     DOI: 10.1097/00000542-199707000-00018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesthesiology        ISSN: 0003-3022            Impact factor:   7.892


  13 in total

Review 1.  Rates of caesarean section and instrumental vaginal delivery in nulliparous women after low concentration epidural infusions or opioid analgesia: systematic review.

Authors:  E H C Liu; A T H Sia
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-05-28

2.  [Survey on practice of regional anaesthesia in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Part 3: Methods in obstetric anaesthesia].

Authors:  E Bartusseck; S Fatehi; J Motsch; T Grau
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 1.041

3.  Eat, drink, and be labouring?

Authors:  Jennifer A Beggs; M Colleen Stainton
Journal:  J Perinat Educ       Date:  2002

Review 4.  Epidural analgesia and lactation.

Authors:  Mert Akbas; A Baris Akcan
Journal:  Eurasian J Med       Date:  2011-04

5.  Exploring factors influencing patient request for epidural analgesia on admission to labor and delivery in a predominantly Latino population.

Authors:  Francisco J Orejuela; Tiffany Garcia; Charles Green; Charlie Kilpatrick; Sara Guzman; Sean Blackwell
Journal:  J Immigr Minor Health       Date:  2012-04

6.  Maternal intrapartum temperature elevation as a risk factor for cesarean delivery and assisted vaginal delivery.

Authors:  E Lieberman; A Cohen; J Lang; F Frigoletto; L Goetzl
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 7.  Economic considerations related to providing adequate pain relief for women in labour: comparison of epidural and intravenous analgesia.

Authors:  Cecil Huang; Alex Macario
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  [A survey of labour pain management in Germany].

Authors:  T Meuser; R Wiese; D Molitor; S Grond; U M Stamer
Journal:  Schmerz       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 1.107

9.  Risk factors associated with epidural use.

Authors:  Samuel M Lancaster; Ursula M Schick; Morwan M Osman; Daniel A Enquobahrie
Journal:  J Clin Med Res       Date:  2012-03-23

10.  Survey of the Factors Associated with a Woman's Choice to Have an Epidural for Labor Analgesia.

Authors:  Jennifer Harkins; Brendan Carvalho; Amy Evers; Sachin Mehta; Edward T Riley
Journal:  Anesthesiol Res Pract       Date:  2010-06-29
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.