BACKGROUND: Anaesthetic practice for caesarean section has changed during the last decades. There is a world-wide shift in obstetric anaesthetic practice in favour of regional anaesthesia. Current data concerning anaesthetic practice in patients undergoing caesarean section from Germany are not available. A comparison with figures from the UK, USA, Norway and other European countries might be of general interest. METHODS: Questionnaires on the practice of anaesthesia for caesarean section and anaesthetic coverage of the obstetric units were sent to 1178 university, tertiary care, district, community and private hospitals in Germany. RESULTS: The 532 completed replies of this survey represent 46.9% of the German obstetric units. Most hospitals (42.3%) have delivery rates between 500 and 1000 per year. General anaesthesia is the most common anaesthetic technique for elective (61%), urgent (83%) and emergency caesarean section (98%). Epidural anaesthesia is performed in 23% of scheduled and 5% of non-scheduled caesarean sections, and spinal anaesthesia in 14% and 10% respectively. Acid aspiration prophylaxis before elective caesarean section is used in 68.7% of the departments. The majority of the departments provide a 24-hour anaesthetic coverage; however, in only 6.2% of the units, this service is assigned to obstetric anaesthesia, exclusively. CONCLUSION: Compared to data from 1978, anaesthetic practice for caesarean section has changed with an increase in regional anaesthesia. However, German anaesthetists prefer general anaesthesia for caesarean section. In contrast, anaesthetists in other countries predominantly use regional techniques, and the difference to German practice is striking. International consensus discussion and recommendations as well as comparable European instruments of quality control in obstetric anaesthesia are desirable.
BACKGROUND: Anaesthetic practice for caesarean section has changed during the last decades. There is a world-wide shift in obstetric anaesthetic practice in favour of regional anaesthesia. Current data concerning anaesthetic practice in patients undergoing caesarean section from Germany are not available. A comparison with figures from the UK, USA, Norway and other European countries might be of general interest. METHODS: Questionnaires on the practice of anaesthesia for caesarean section and anaesthetic coverage of the obstetric units were sent to 1178 university, tertiary care, district, community and private hospitals in Germany. RESULTS: The 532 completed replies of this survey represent 46.9% of the German obstetric units. Most hospitals (42.3%) have delivery rates between 500 and 1000 per year. General anaesthesia is the most common anaesthetic technique for elective (61%), urgent (83%) and emergency caesarean section (98%). Epidural anaesthesia is performed in 23% of scheduled and 5% of non-scheduled caesarean sections, and spinal anaesthesia in 14% and 10% respectively. Acid aspiration prophylaxis before elective caesarean section is used in 68.7% of the departments. The majority of the departments provide a 24-hour anaesthetic coverage; however, in only 6.2% of the units, this service is assigned to obstetric anaesthesia, exclusively. CONCLUSION: Compared to data from 1978, anaesthetic practice for caesarean section has changed with an increase in regional anaesthesia. However, German anaesthetists prefer general anaesthesia for caesarean section. In contrast, anaesthetists in other countries predominantly use regional techniques, and the difference to German practice is striking. International consensus discussion and recommendations as well as comparable European instruments of quality control in obstetric anaesthesia are desirable.