O. Breton , F. Vial , J. Feugeas , K. Podrez , K. Hosseini , S. Boileau , P. Guerci , H. Bouaziz
{"title":"Acceptabilité des risques associés à la mise en place d’une analgésie péridurale obstétricale","authors":"O. Breton , F. Vial , J. Feugeas , K. Podrez , K. Hosseini , S. Boileau , P. Guerci , H. Bouaziz","doi":"10.1016/j.annfar.2014.06.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>Evaluation of the acceptability of complications related to obstetrical epidural analgesia in two populations, parturients and anesthesiologists.</p></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><p>Prospective, transversal, single center study.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>Evaluation of the acceptability of complications associated with obstetric epidural analgesia performed using a questionnaire of six clinical scenarii in two populations: parturients cared at the University maternity of Nancy and anesthesiologists of Lorraine. Patients were interviewed by an anesthesiologist, physicians via Internet. Acceptability was assessed using two tools, the absolute acceptability with a visual analog scale and the relative acceptability obtained by classifying clinical scenario against each other, in ascending order of acceptability.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>One hundred and forty-six parturients and 87 anesthetists assessed the acceptability of the different scenarios. The three less serious scenarios (hypotension, failure, dural tap) were acceptable for both populations. One case (spinal hematoma) was unacceptable for parturients. Three cases of varying severity (failure, dural tap, plexus injury with sequelae) were judged significantly less acceptable by patients than physicians (5.9 vs. 7.9 [<em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->0.001], 5.75 vs. 8.1 [<em>P</em> <!--><<!--> <!-->0.01], 4.1 vs. 5.1 [<em>P</em> <!-->=<!--> <!-->0.035]). Multivariate analysis did not show any predictive factor of acceptability in both populations.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In this study, the overall acceptability of the inherent complications of epidural analgesia was good in the two populations. It was essentially based on the notion of severity and preventability. A large interindividual variability was observed and a better acceptance by the anesthesiologists.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7913,"journal":{"name":"Annales Francaises D Anesthesie Et De Reanimation","volume":"33 11","pages":"Pages 581-586"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.annfar.2014.06.004","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annales Francaises D Anesthesie Et De Reanimation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S075076581400238X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives
Evaluation of the acceptability of complications related to obstetrical epidural analgesia in two populations, parturients and anesthesiologists.
Study design
Prospective, transversal, single center study.
Materials and methods
Evaluation of the acceptability of complications associated with obstetric epidural analgesia performed using a questionnaire of six clinical scenarii in two populations: parturients cared at the University maternity of Nancy and anesthesiologists of Lorraine. Patients were interviewed by an anesthesiologist, physicians via Internet. Acceptability was assessed using two tools, the absolute acceptability with a visual analog scale and the relative acceptability obtained by classifying clinical scenario against each other, in ascending order of acceptability.
Results
One hundred and forty-six parturients and 87 anesthetists assessed the acceptability of the different scenarios. The three less serious scenarios (hypotension, failure, dural tap) were acceptable for both populations. One case (spinal hematoma) was unacceptable for parturients. Three cases of varying severity (failure, dural tap, plexus injury with sequelae) were judged significantly less acceptable by patients than physicians (5.9 vs. 7.9 [P < 0.001], 5.75 vs. 8.1 [P < 0.01], 4.1 vs. 5.1 [P = 0.035]). Multivariate analysis did not show any predictive factor of acceptability in both populations.
Conclusion
In this study, the overall acceptability of the inherent complications of epidural analgesia was good in the two populations. It was essentially based on the notion of severity and preventability. A large interindividual variability was observed and a better acceptance by the anesthesiologists.
目的探讨产妇和麻醉医师对硬膜外镇痛相关并发症的可接受性。研究设计前瞻性、横向、单中心研究。材料和方法通过对两组人群(南希大学产科医院和洛林大学麻醉师)的6个临床场景的问卷调查,对产科硬膜外镇痛相关并发症的可接受性进行评估。由麻醉师、内科医生通过网络对患者进行访谈。可接受性采用两种工具进行评估,即通过视觉模拟量表获得的绝对可接受性和通过对临床情景进行相互分类获得的相对可接受性,可接受性从高到低依次递增。结果146名产妇和87名麻醉师对不同场景的可接受性进行了评估。三种不太严重的情况(低血压、心力衰竭、硬脑膜穿刺)对两组人群都是可接受的。1例(脊髓血肿)患儿不能接受。三例不同严重程度的患者(手术失败、硬脑膜穿刺、神经丛损伤伴后遗症)被认为比医生更难以接受(5.9 vs. 7.9;0.001], 5.75 vs. 8.1 [P <0.01], 4.1 vs. 5.1 [P = 0.035])。多变量分析未显示两种人群的可接受性的任何预测因素。结论在本研究中,两组患者对硬膜外镇痛固有并发症的总体可接受性较好。它基本上是基于严重性和可预防性的概念。观察到很大的个体间差异,麻醉医师更容易接受。