Anesthesia practices for management of labor pain and cesarean delivery in France (EPIDOL): A cross-sectional survey.

Cesarean delivery Epidural Labor Obstetric anesthesia Pain

Journal

Anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine
ISSN: 2352-5568
Titre abrégé: Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med
Pays: France
ID NLM: 101652401

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
12 Sep 2023
Historique:
received: 20 04 2023
revised: 25 08 2023
accepted: 26 08 2023
pubmed: 15 9 2023
medline: 15 9 2023
entrez: 14 9 2023
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

This study aimed to collect obstetric anesthesia practice and patient-reported outcomes as an update to the last French Obstetric Anesthesia survey from 1996. Maternity units were randomly selected across France and surveyed for 7 consecutive days from February, 2016, to January, 2017. Data was gathered prospectively by questionnaires filled out by patients and anesthesia providers. There were 1885 questionnaires received from 56 units, with 379 cesarean delivery (CD) and 1506 vaginal delivery (VD) cases analyzed. The overall neuraxial labor analgesia (NLA) rate was 82.5% (95% CI [82.4-82.6]), with 70.3% (95% CI [71.4-71.6]) receiving automated administration (PCEA/PIEB). NLA was effective throughout labor in 68.2% of cases, however, severe pain was reported by 29.4% of patients. The overall rate of alternative approaches for labor analgesia was 19.5% (95%CI [19.2-19.7]). Obesity (OR 2.8; 95% CI [1.0-7.5], p < 0.04) and delivery in level I units (OR 0.6; 95% CI [0.5-0.9], p < 0.01) were associated with severe pain during VD. Satisfaction was found to be similar in patients delivering with or without NLA. The incidence of pain during CD was similar in scheduled versus non-scheduled CD. Failure of NLA during CD was associated with severe pain (OR 10.0; 95% CI [3.1-31.9], p < 0.01) and dissatisfaction (OR 26.2; 95% CI [3.0-225.1], p < 0.01). Despite the high NLA rate in France, a significant proportion of women experience severe pain during labor and delivery. This study emphasizes the need for further practice guidelines in obstetric anesthesia to ensure optimal pain management and improve patients' experience during childbirth. govNCT02853890.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
This study aimed to collect obstetric anesthesia practice and patient-reported outcomes as an update to the last French Obstetric Anesthesia survey from 1996.
METHODS METHODS
Maternity units were randomly selected across France and surveyed for 7 consecutive days from February, 2016, to January, 2017. Data was gathered prospectively by questionnaires filled out by patients and anesthesia providers.
RESULTS RESULTS
There were 1885 questionnaires received from 56 units, with 379 cesarean delivery (CD) and 1506 vaginal delivery (VD) cases analyzed. The overall neuraxial labor analgesia (NLA) rate was 82.5% (95% CI [82.4-82.6]), with 70.3% (95% CI [71.4-71.6]) receiving automated administration (PCEA/PIEB). NLA was effective throughout labor in 68.2% of cases, however, severe pain was reported by 29.4% of patients. The overall rate of alternative approaches for labor analgesia was 19.5% (95%CI [19.2-19.7]). Obesity (OR 2.8; 95% CI [1.0-7.5], p < 0.04) and delivery in level I units (OR 0.6; 95% CI [0.5-0.9], p < 0.01) were associated with severe pain during VD. Satisfaction was found to be similar in patients delivering with or without NLA. The incidence of pain during CD was similar in scheduled versus non-scheduled CD. Failure of NLA during CD was associated with severe pain (OR 10.0; 95% CI [3.1-31.9], p < 0.01) and dissatisfaction (OR 26.2; 95% CI [3.0-225.1], p < 0.01).
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Despite the high NLA rate in France, a significant proportion of women experience severe pain during labor and delivery. This study emphasizes the need for further practice guidelines in obstetric anesthesia to ensure optimal pain management and improve patients' experience during childbirth.
CLINICALTRIALS RESULTS
govNCT02853890.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37709198
pii: S2352-5568(23)00110-8
doi: 10.1016/j.accpm.2023.101302
pii:
doi:

Banques de données

ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02853890']

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

101302

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.

Auteurs

Dominique Chassard (D)

Service d'Anesthésie-Réanimation, Hôpital Femme Mère Enfant 59, Boulevard Pinel, F-69677 Bron Cedex, France. Electronic address: dominique.chassard@chu-lyon.fr.

Carole Langlois-Jacques (C)

Service de Biostatistique des Hospices Civils de Lyon 165, Chemin du Grand Revoyet, Bât 4D, F-69495 Pierre-Bénite, France.

Marie Naaim (M)

Service d'Anesthésie-Réanimation, Hôpital Femme Mère Enfant 59, Boulevard Pinel, F-69677 Bron Cedex, France.

Sonia Galetti (S)

INSERM, CIC1407, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Groupement Hospitalier Est, 59 Bvd Pinel, F-69500 Bron, France.

Lionel Bouvet (L)

Service d'Anesthésie-Réanimation, Hôpital Femme Mère Enfant 59, Boulevard Pinel, F-69677 Bron Cedex, France.

Elsa Coz (E)

Service de Biostatistique des Hospices Civils de Lyon 165, Chemin du Grand Revoyet, Bât 4D, F-69495 Pierre-Bénite, France.

René Ecochard (R)

Service de Biostatistique des Hospices Civils de Lyon 165, Chemin du Grand Revoyet, Bât 4D, F-69495 Pierre-Bénite, France.

Aurélie Portefaix (A)

INSERM, CIC1407, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Groupement Hospitalier Est, 59 Bvd Pinel, F-69500 Bron, France; UMR 5558, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, F-69100, France.

Behrouz Kassai-Koupai (B)

INSERM, CIC1407, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Groupement Hospitalier Est, 59 Bvd Pinel, F-69500 Bron, France.

Classifications MeSH