L Hernández González, N Brogly, S Manrique Muñoz, C Suárez Castaño, G Yerga Pozo, M Raynard Ortiz, E Guasch Arévalo
{"title":"National survey on clinical practice in obstetric analgesia in Spain.","authors":"L Hernández González, N Brogly, S Manrique Muñoz, C Suárez Castaño, G Yerga Pozo, M Raynard Ortiz, E Guasch Arévalo","doi":"10.1016/j.redare.2024.07.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>A national survey was conducted among maternity hospitals nationwide to understand the variability in clinical practice for obstetric analgesia and to reach a consensus on optimal care in the future in Spain.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Spanish experts in obstetric anesthesiology designed a survey on the practice of obstetric analgesia during childbirth, following a Delphi process. The survey was sent to 195 Spanish maternity hospitals between April and September 2022 using Google Forms. A descriptive study of the results was performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Responses were obtained from 108 centres (55.4%), of which 88 (83.8%) were public hospitals. The most commonly used technique was epidural analgesia in 97 (92.4%) centres. Nine (8.6%) centres used the combined spinal-epidural (CSE) technique, 5 (4.8%) used spinal analgesia, and 3 (2.9%) used dural puncture epidural (DPE) analgesia. The most commonly used local anaesthetic was levobupivacaine 0.1-0.25% in 82 (78.1%) centres. Fentanyl or sufentanil were added to the local anaesthetic in 96 (91.4%) centres. Epidural maintenance was performed with continuous epidural infusion (CEI) + patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) or programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) + PCEA in 64 (60.9%) and 33 (30.5%) centres, respectively. Fifteen (14.3%) centres lacked alternative techniques to epidural analgesia and 25 (23.8%) did not follow obstetric analgesia protocols.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite the variability in clinical practice for obstetric analgesia in Spain, the vast majority of centres follow recommendations in this field. There is room for improvement, which should be considered a fundamental strategy for progressing towards excellence.</p>","PeriodicalId":94196,"journal":{"name":"Revista espanola de anestesiologia y reanimacion","volume":" ","pages":"732-739"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista espanola de anestesiologia y reanimacion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.redare.2024.07.007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: A national survey was conducted among maternity hospitals nationwide to understand the variability in clinical practice for obstetric analgesia and to reach a consensus on optimal care in the future in Spain.
Materials and methods: Spanish experts in obstetric anesthesiology designed a survey on the practice of obstetric analgesia during childbirth, following a Delphi process. The survey was sent to 195 Spanish maternity hospitals between April and September 2022 using Google Forms. A descriptive study of the results was performed.
Results: Responses were obtained from 108 centres (55.4%), of which 88 (83.8%) were public hospitals. The most commonly used technique was epidural analgesia in 97 (92.4%) centres. Nine (8.6%) centres used the combined spinal-epidural (CSE) technique, 5 (4.8%) used spinal analgesia, and 3 (2.9%) used dural puncture epidural (DPE) analgesia. The most commonly used local anaesthetic was levobupivacaine 0.1-0.25% in 82 (78.1%) centres. Fentanyl or sufentanil were added to the local anaesthetic in 96 (91.4%) centres. Epidural maintenance was performed with continuous epidural infusion (CEI) + patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) or programmed intermittent epidural bolus (PIEB) + PCEA in 64 (60.9%) and 33 (30.5%) centres, respectively. Fifteen (14.3%) centres lacked alternative techniques to epidural analgesia and 25 (23.8%) did not follow obstetric analgesia protocols.
Conclusion: Despite the variability in clinical practice for obstetric analgesia in Spain, the vast majority of centres follow recommendations in this field. There is room for improvement, which should be considered a fundamental strategy for progressing towards excellence.