Search

Background: Neuraxial anesthesia with reactivation of a labor epidural catheter is commonly utilized for postpartum tubal ligations (PPTL), although the optimal anesthetic approach is unknown. We assessed institutional anesthesia practices for PPTL, and evaluated the failure rates of reactivation of labor epidural catheters, de novo spinal anesthesia, and spinal anesthesia after failed blocks., Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort analysis of 300 consecutive patients who underwent a PPTL and 100 having spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Anesthetic management data (existing labor epidural catheter reactivation, de novo spinal anesthesia or general anesthesia) were collected from electronic medical records. Anesthetic block failure rates were determined for each anesthetic technique., Results: The failure rate was 15% for de novo spinal anesthesia and 23% after failed reactivation of a labor epidural catheter or spinal anesthesia. The epidural catheter reactivation failure rate was 35%. The failure rate of spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery was 4%. Drug dosage, epidural catheter use in labor, time since epidural catheter placement or delivery, labor neuraxial technique (combined spinal-epidural, epidural), supplemental top-up doses during labor, and anesthesiologist experience did not predict neuraxial anesthesia failures., Conclusions: Our analysis revealed an unexpectedly high neuraxial anesthesia failure rate even when de novo spinal anesthesia was used for PPTL. The results are consistent with other institutions' recent findings, and are higher than spinal anesthesia failure rates associated with cesarean delivery. Further studies are required to determine optimal anesthesia dosing strategies, and to understand the mechanisms behind high neuraxial anesthesia failures for PPTL., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Inadequately treated postoperative pain following caesarean delivery can delay recovery and the ability to care for a newborn. Effectiveness studies of interventions to treat postoperative caesarean delivery pain measure different outcomes, limiting data pooling for meta-analysis. We performed a comprehensive review of existing outcomes with the aim of recommending core outcomes for future research., Methods: A scoping review to identify all outcomes reported in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and clinical trial registries of interventions to treat or prevent postoperative caesarean delivery pain, with postoperative pain as a primary outcome measure. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, LILACS, Embase, CDSR and CRCT for studies from May 2016 to 2021. Outcomes were extracted and frequencies tabulated., Results: Ninety RCTs and 11 trial registries were included. In total, 392 outcomes (375 inpatient and 17 outpatient) were identified and categorised. The most reported outcome domain was analgesia (n = 242/375, 64.5%), reported in 96% of inpatient studies, with analgesic consumption accounting for 108/375, 28.8% of analgesia outcomes. The second most common domain was pain intensity (n = 120/375, 32%), reported in 97% of inpatient studies, using the visual analogue scale (68/120, 59%) and the numerical reporting scale (37/120, 25%). Maternal and neonatal adverse effects accounted for 65/375 (17.3%) and 19/375 (5.1%) of inpatient outcomes, respectively., Conclusions: Outcomes reported in RCTs for postoperative caesarean delivery pain vary widely. The results of this review suggest that standardisation is needed to promote research efficiency and aid future meta-analyses to identify optimal postoperative caesarean delivery pain management., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: P. Sultan is an Arline and Pete Harman Endowed Faculty Scholar of the Stanford Maternal and Child Health Research Institute., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Peripartum quantitative blood loss (QBL) measurement is recommended over visual estimation. However, QBL measurement after vaginal delivery has been inadequately evaluated. The primary aim of this study was to determine the characteristics of QBL measurements from a large, multicenter cohort of patients having vaginal deliveries. We also determined the incidence of postpartum hemorrhage (PPH) and the relationship between gravimetric QBL from weighed sponges vs. volumetric QBL from liquid drape or suction cannister contents., Methods: Data were collected from 41 institutions in the United States of America that use an automated QBL device after vaginal delivery as part of routine care. The QBL device tracks cumulative blood loss based on gravimetry and volumetric V-drape assessment, automatically subtracting the dry weights of all blood-containing sponges, towels, pads and other supplies as well as the amniotic fluid volume., Results: Between January 2017 and April 2020, 104 079 QBL values were obtained from patients having vaginal deliveries. Total median [IQR] QBL was 171 [61-362] mL. The PPH incidence, stratified by QBL, was 15.2% (>500 mL), 3.4% (>1000 mL), and 1.0% (>1500 mL). The contribution of QBL from V-drapes was 60.6±26.3% of total QBL., Conclusion: Results from this large set of QBL measurements and the PPH incidence provide normative "real-world" clinical care values that can be expected as hospitals transition from estimated blood loss to QBL to assess the blood loss at vaginal delivery., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Postpartum hemorrhage is the leading cause of maternal mortality worldwide, and optimal management requires accurate blood loss estimations. The aim of this study was to assess whether differences exist between visually estimated blood loss vs. actual blood loss based on delivery mode, blood volume or distribution/location and knowledge of patient's current cardiovascular status., Methods: For this observational cohort study, photographs were taken of 18 blood loss scenarios for vaginal delivery and cesarean delivery, and six photographs were duplicated and annotated with maternal vital signs. Scenarios were categorized into 50% (500 mL), 100% (1000 mL) and 200% (2000 mL) of the defined blood loss volume for postpartum hemorrhage and the photographs were shown to participants to visually estimate blood loss volumes., Results: The mean ± standard deviation estimates of actual 500 mL, 1000 mL and 2000 mL blood loss volumes were 1208 ± 438 mL, 1676 ± 630 mL and 2637 ± 1123 mL, respectively (P <0.001 among groups). The difference was significantly greater in vaginal delivery than cesarean delivery scenarios (1064 ± 849 mL vs. 284 ± 456 mL; P <0.001). Estimated blood loss volume was not influenced by blood loss distribution/location, or by provider group or experience. The cardiovascular status of the patient impacted estimations only if tachycardia and hypotension were present., Conclusions: Most providers significantly overestimated blood loss volumes (by nearly 700 mL). Provider and scenario factors that impact inaccuracies in visual estimated blood loss identified in this study can be used to guide education and training., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Ultrasound may be useful to identify the spinal anesthesia insertion point, particularly when landmarks are not palpable. We tested the hypothesis that the number of needle redirections/re-insertions is lower when using a handheld ultrasound device compared with palpation in obese women undergoing spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery., Methods: Study recruits were obese (body mass index (BMI) >30 kg/m 2 ) women with impalpable bony landmarks who were undergoing spinal anesthesia for elective cesarean delivery. Women were randomized to ultrasound or palpation. The primary study outcome was a composite between-group comparison of total number of needle redirections (any withdrawal and re-advancement of the needle and/or introducer within the intervertebral space) or re-insertions (any new skin puncture in the same or different intervertebral space) per patient. Secondary outcomes included insertion site identification time and patient verbal numerical pain score (0-10) for comfort during surgical skin incision., Results: Forty women completed the study. The mean BMI (standard deviation) for the ultrasound group was 39.8 (5.5) kg/m 2 and for the palpation group 37.3 (5.2) kg/m 2 . There was no difference in the composite primary outcome (median (interquartile range) [range]) between the ultrasound group (4 (2-13) [2-22]) and the palpation group (6 (4-10) [1-17]) (P=0.22), with the 95% confidence interval of the difference 2 (-1.7 to 5.7). There were no differences in the secondary outcomes., Conclusions: Handheld ultrasound did not demonstrate any advantages over traditional palpation techniques for spinal anesthesia in an obese population undergoing cesarean delivery, although the study was underpowered to show a difference., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The EpiFaith® syringe is a novel loss-of-resistance syringe that utilizes a spring-loaded plunger that automatically moves forward within the syringe when there is a loss of resistance. We evaluated the syringe in a clinical setting among a cohort of pregnant women receiving neuraxial labor analgesia., Methods: In a non-randomized observational study, four anesthesiologists used the EpiFaith® syringe 10 times each while placing epidural catheters for labor analgesia. The anesthesiologists scored each placement on an 11-point Likert scale (-5 = absolutely worse, 0 = the same, and 5 = absolutely better than using their regular loss-of-resistance syringe technique)., Results: All 40 neuraxial placements correctly located the epidural space. Air was used in the syringe in 35 of the 40 cases. In 50%, 27.5% and 22.5% of cases the anesthesiologists reported that using the EpiFaith® syringe was better than, the same as, or worse than using their regular syringe, respectively. There were no inadvertent dural punctures., Conclusions: This feasibility study found that three of the four anesthesiologists scored the EpiFaith® syringe as better or the same as using their regular loss-of-resistance syringe. More extensive studies are required to determine if the EpiFaith® syringe reduces adverse outcomes such as unintentional dural punctures., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Study Objective: We aimed to determine whether patient-reported quality of recovery differed between spontaneous and operative vaginal delivery. We also aimed to psychometrically evaluate the Obstetric Quality of Recovery-10 scoring tool (ObsQoR-10) for use in this setting., Design: Single center observational cohort study., Setting: Labour and delivery ward at a peripheral general hospital within the United Kingdom, over a 10-month period., Patients: 123 women delivering via either spontaneous (n = 68) or operative vaginal delivery (n = 55)., Interventions: Women were asked to complete the ObsQoR-10 and global health visual analogue scale (0-100) on postpartum day 1. A convenience sample of consenting parturients delivering via spontaneous or operative vaginal delivery (forceps or vacuum assisted), were included. In total, 123 deliveries were included (68 via spontaneous and 55 via operative vaginal delivery), with no dropouts., Measurements: Primary outcome was ObsQoR-10 score and secondary outcomes included measures of validity, reliability and feasibility of ObsQoR-10., Main Results: Quality of recovery was better following spontaneous vaginal delivery. ObsQoR-10 scores were 80.2 (95% CI 76.4-83.9) and 72.1 (95% CI 67.3-76.9], (a difference in score of 8.1 [95% CI 2.1-14.0]) following spontaneous and operative vaginal delivery respectively (p = 0.008)., Validity: ObsQoR-10 correlated with global health visual analogue scale score (R = 0.52; p = 0.01) and scores were higher in women requiring <36 h compared to ≥36 h postpartum hospital stay (81.3 (95% CI 77.9-84.7) versus 72.6 (95% CI 67.9-77.2] hours respectively, (a difference in score of 8.7 [95% CI 2.8-14.6]; p = 0.004). Reliability: ObsQoR-10 demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.82 and inter-item correlation = 0.32) good split-half reliability (Spearman-Brown Prophesy Reliability Estimate = 0.88) and excellent test-re-test reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient of 0.86 [95% CI 0.72-0.93]). Feasibility: All women completed the survey with a median completion time of 2.5 min., Conclusions: Quality of recovery appears to be better following spontaneous compared to operative vaginal delivery. This study also demonstrates that ObsQoR-10 is a valid and reliable tool for use following these delivery modes., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None of the authors have any competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: This systematic review aimed to determine whether enhanced recovery after caesarean delivery (ERAC) protocols should be adopted., Methods: We searched four databases and abstracts from meetings for studies comparing ERAC to standard care. We report interventions, outcomes, qualitative impact of ERAC implementation and use GRADE scoring to determine quality of evidence and make recommendations regarding ERAC adoption, based on key outcomes (length of stay, financial savings, satisfaction, re-admission, opioid usage, breastfeeding success and maternal-neonatal bonding)., Results: Eleven published studies and 36 abstracts evaluating ERAC were included. Forty-two study interventions (40 in published studies) and 90 outcome measures (60 in published studies) were used. Most studies showed a reduction in hospital stay (6/7 studies) and reduced costs (2/2 studies) with ERAC compared with standard care. Satisfaction was inconsistently reported. Re-admission rates were similar between groups. Two studies showed a reduction and two showed no difference in opioid consumption with ERAC. One study showed improvement and another showed no change in outpatient breastfeeding rates with ERAC. One study showed better inpatient maternal-neonatal bonding. The GRADE level of evidence was low or very low for all outcomes., Conclusions: Studies evaluating ERAC used heterogeneous interventions and outcomes. Although there is currently low- or very low-level evidence supporting all outcomes evaluated, the majority of studies showed some benefits and none reported harm. On balance, we recommend the use of ERAC. Future studies are needed to strengthen ERAC recommendations by standardising interventions and reported outcomes., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite significant improvements in outcomes following non-obstetric surgery with implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols, development of these protocols for cesarean delivery is lacking. We evaluated implementation of an ERAS protocol for patients undergoing elective cesarean delivery, specifically the effect on opioid consumption, pain scores and length of stay as well as complications and re-admissions., Methods: An ERAS protocol was developed and implemented for women undergoing elective cesarean delivery. The protocol construction included specific evidence-based items applicable to peripartum management and these were grouped into the three major phases of patient care: antepartum, intrapartum and postpartum. A before-and-after study design was used to compare maternal outcomes. To account for confounders between groups, a propensity matched scoring analysis was used. The primary outcome was postpartum opioid use in mg-morphine equivalents (MMEQ)., Results: We included 357 (n=196 before; n=161 after) women who underwent elective cesarean delivery. A significant difference in opioid consumption (28.4 ± 24.1 vs 46.1 ± 37.0 MMEQ, P <0.001) and in per-day postoperative opioid consumption (10.9 ± 8.7 vs 15.1 ± 10.3 MMEQ, P <0.001), lower peak pain scores (7 [5-9] vs 8 [7-9], P=0.007) and a shorter hospital length of stay (2.5 ± 0.5 vs 2.9 ± 1.2 days, P <0.001) were found after the introduction of the ERAS protocol., Conclusions: Implementation of ERAS protocols for elective cesarean delivery is associated with significant improvements in analgesic and recovery outcomes. These improvements in quality of care suggest ERAS protocols should be considered for elective cesarean delivery., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Dexamethasone is an effective analgesic and anti-emetic in patients undergoing many surgical procedures but its effects on pain after cesarean delivery are poorly studied. The aim of this study was to evaluate if routine intra-operative administration of dexamethasone improved analgesia and decreased postoperative nausea and vomiting after scheduled cesarean delivery., Methods: Electronic medical record data for scheduled cesarean deliveries performed under neuraxial anesthesia, before and after a practice change that introduced the routine use of intravenous dexamethasone 4 mg, were obtained. Patients were analyzed based on whether they received routine care (n=182) or also received dexamethasone (n=187). The primary outcome was time to first opioid use. Secondary outcomes included postoperative opioid consumption, pain scores, incidence and treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting, satisfaction and length of stay., Results: There was no significant difference between groups in median time to first postoperative opioid administration (15.8 [3.4-48.0] h routine care vs 14.7 [3.2-38.8] h routine care plus dexamethasone, P=0.08). There were no significant differences in any secondary outcomes., Conclusions: This impact study involving more than 360 patients suggests that routine administration of intra-operative intravenous dexamethasone 4 mg does not provide additional analgesic benefit after scheduled cesarean delivery, in the context of a multimodal postoperative analgesic regimen. Studies are required to determine if a larger dose or repeated administration influence postoperative analgesia or side effects, or whether certain subsets of patients may benefit., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Current pain and analgesic management strategies apply a standardized one-size-fits-all approach to women undergoing cesarean delivery. These standardized protocols do not account for significant variability in women's pain and may lead to under-treatment in patients with high analgesic needs and overtreatment, associated with increased analgesic-related side effects, in women with low analgesic needs and higher analgesic drug sensitivity. Pre-operative identification of patients at-risk of developing severe pain might allow clinicians to optimize care by offering personalized, stratified or targeted analgesic treatment protocols. Pre-operative pain prediction tools are only of moderate value in this regard. Pain reporting during local anesthetic infiltration and answering simple rating questions about anticipated pain and analgesic needs are the easiest tools to apply and show some promise for post-cesarean delivery pain prediction. Patient-driven analgesic dose and protocol selection (based on individual preferences for pain relief and for avoidance of side effects after cesarean delivery) may optimally balance individual pain needs and side effect concerns compared to standardized postoperative pain treatment protocols. Individualized or stratified post-discharge opioid prescribing practices have been shown to reduce unnecessary opioid analgesic prescriptions and consumption, so should be implemented routinely. Outcomes other than pain and analgesic use, including recovery measures and maternal satisfaction metrics, should be considered when evaluating personalized or patient-selected pain treatment protocols., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Few robust scoring tools exist to assess recovery following caesarean delivery (CD). We evaluated a new obstetric quality of recovery score (ObsQoR-11, initially formulated for elective CD) following non-elective CD., Methods: ObsQoR-11 questionnaires were completed by women at day one post non-elective CD. Convergent validity was assessed by correlation of ObsQoR-11 with a 100 mm numerical rating scale (NRS) of general health status; discriminant validity by correlation with good vs poor recovery (NRS of ≥70 vs <70 mm, respectively); and content validity by correlation with length of stay (LOS), CD category, parity, gestation, previous CD, duration, blood loss, haemoglobin, age and body mass index. Cronbach's alpha, inter-item, split-half and test-retest correlation assessed reliability. Feasibility was tested by recruitment rate and time for ObsQoR-11 completion., Results: One hundred women completed ObsQoR-11 at 24 h and 20 women repeated it at 25 h. ObsQoR-11 correlated strongly with NRS (r = 0.72 [95% CI 0.61 to 0.81], P <0.0001); discriminated well between good versus poor recovery (median [IQR] score 97 [86.5-101] vs 64 [50.5-78.5], P <0.0001); correlated to LOS (r = -0.24 [-0.42 to -0.04], P=0.02) and parity (r = 0.24 [0.04 to 0.42], P=0.02). Reliability was acceptable: Cronbach's alpha 0.75; inter-item correlation >0.15; split-half reliability 0.96; and intra-class correlation >0.6; no floor or ceiling effects. One hundred percent completed the ObsQoR-11 (median [IQR] completion time 117 [89-156] s)., Conclusions: ObsQoR-11 is valid and reliable in assessing recovery after non-elective CD. Further research should assess generalisability and use following vaginal delivery., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The study aimed to compare the accuracy of epidural depth estimation of a handheld ultrasound device, with an integrated algorithm that estimates epidural depth (AU; Accuro, Rivanna Medical), to that of a console ultrasound machine (GU; GE LOGIC TM S8)., Methods: Women requesting labor epidural analgesia consented to this prospective cohort study. The L2/3, L3/4, and L4/5 interspaces and the respective depths to the epidural space were identified, marked and measured using an AU and GU. An anesthesia provider who was blinded to ultrasound depth measurements performed epidural analgesia at one of the ultrasound identified insertion points and recorded the Tuohy needle depth at loss-of-resistance. Bland Altman analysis was used to measure the agreement between the epidural depths measured by the AU and GU., Results: A total of 47 women were analyzed. The mean ± standard deviation body mass index of the study cohort was 29 ± 5 kg/m 2 [range 23-45]. The mean difference between the epidural depths measured by the AU and GU was -0.29 cm [95% limit of agreement 0.50 to -0.91]. The mean difference between the depth to the epidural space measured by the GU versus the needle depth was -0.33 cm [95% CI -0.49 to -0.16]. The previously reported AU versus needle depth was -0.61 cm [95% CI -0.79 to -0.44]., Conclusion: The AU and GU provided comparable epidural depth estimates. The AU device may be a reasonable alternative to more sophisticated ultrasound devices in determining the epidural space and depth in a non-obese obstetric population., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Whilst validated quality-of-recovery (QoR) tools exist for general surgery, there is no specific obstetric equivalent. We aimed to develop and evaluate a modified QoR score after elective Caesarean delivery., Methods: Twenty-two obstetric specific items were selected following review and modification of the QoR-40 survey by 16 experts and interviews with 50 stakeholders. Item selection was based on relevance to Caesarean delivery and endorsement by >66% of stakeholders. Items were tested on women pre-delivery, at 24 h, and 25 h post-delivery. An 11-item obstetric-specific QoR score (ObsQoR-11) was created based on correlation with a numerical rating scale (NRS) of global health status (r>0.20) at all time points. Reliability, responsiveness, acceptability, and feasibility were tested., Results: One hundred and fifty-two women responded to the 22-item questionnaire pre-delivery (complete in 146), 100 at 24 h, and 10 at 25 h. The ObsQoR-11 correlated with the global health status NRS (r=0.53; 95% confidence interval: 0.43-0.62; P<0.0001) and discriminated good vs poor recovery (NRS score ≥70 vs <70 mm) at 24 h. There was a negative correlation between the ObsQoR-11 score at 24 h and hospital length of stay (r=-0.39; P=0.003). ObsQoR-11 was reliable (internal consistency: 0.85; split-half 0.76; test-retest intra-class correlation coefficient r i >0.6 in 82% of items) and responsive (Cohen effect size: 1.36; standardised response mean: 0.85). A longer 22-item ObsQoR had high (97%) completion rates and short (median: 2 min) completion times., Conclusions: The ObsQoR-11 provides a valid, reliable, and responsive global assessment of recovery after elective Caesarean delivery., (Copyright © 2018 British Journal of Anaesthesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Prediction models to identify parturients who experience protracted pain, prolonged opioid use, and delayed self-assessed functional recovery are currently inadequate., Methods: For this study, 213 nulliparous women who planned vaginal delivery were enrolled and assessed daily until they completed three outcomes: (1) pain resolution; (2) opioid cessation; and (3) self-assessed functional recovery to predelivery level. The primary composite endpoint, 'pain and opioid-free functional recovery' was the time required to reach all three endpoints. The subjects were divided into two categories (the worst (longest time) 20% and remaining 80%) for reaching the primary composite endpoint, and each individual component. Prediction models for prolonged recovery were constructed using multivariate logistic regression with demographic, obstetric, psychological, and health-related quality of life characteristics as candidate predictors., Results: Labour induction (vs spontaneous labour onset) predicted the worst 20% for the primary composite endpoint in the final multivariate model. Labour induction and higher postpartum day 1 numerical rating score for pain were predictors for being in the worst 20% for both functional recovery and pain burden. Labour type, delivery type, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) anxiety score, RAND 36 Item Health Survey 1.0 (SF-36) physical health composite score, and postpartum breastfeeding success were predictive of delayed opioid cessation., Conclusions: Labour induction and elevated numerical rating score for pain are predictive of poor recovery after childbirth. Further research is necessary to determine whether modification would benefit mothers at risk for poor recovery., (Copyright © 2018 British Journal of Anaesthesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The optimal local-anaesthetic (LA) dose for transversus-abdominis-plane (TAP) block is unclear. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to determine whether TAP blocks for Caesarean delivery (CD) with low-dose (LD) LA demonstrated non-inferiority in terms of analgesic efficacy, compared with high-dose (HD) LA., Methods: A literature search was performed for randomised controlled trials examining the analgesic efficacy of TAP blocks vs control after CD. The different dosing used in these studies was classified as HD or LD (bupivacaine equivalents >50 or ≤50 mg per block side, respectively). The pooled results of each dose group vs control were indirectly compared using the Q test. The primary outcome was 24 h opioid consumption. Secondary outcomes included 6 and 24 h postoperative pain scores, time to first analgesia, 6 h opioid consumption, opioid-related side-effects, and maternal satisfaction., Results: Fourteen studies consisting of 770 women (389 TAP and 381 control) were included. Compared with controls, the 24 h opioid consumption (milligram morphine equivalents) was lower in HD [mean difference (MD) 95% confidence interval (CI) -22.41 (-38.56, -6.26); P=0.007; I 2 =93%] and LD [MD 95% CI -16.29 (-29.74, -2.84); P=0.02; I 2 =98%] TAP groups. However, no differences were demonstrated between the HD and LD groups (P=0.57). There were also no differences between the HD and LD groups for the 6 h opioid consumption, time to first analgesia, 6 and 24 h pain scores, postoperative nausea and vomiting, pruritus, and maternal satisfaction., Conclusions: Low-dose TAP blocks for Caesarean delivery provide analgesia and opioid-sparing effects comparable with the high-dose blocks. This suggests that lower doses can be used to reduce local anaesthetic toxicity risk without compromising the analgesic efficacy., (Copyright © 2017 British Journal of Anaesthesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Core-to-peripheral redistribution of heat, secondary to sympathetic-mediated vasodilation, is the major mechanism leading to early perioperative hypothermia after neuraxial anesthesia. The study aim was to determine if preoperative anterior thigh (peripheral lower extremity) temperature predicted perioperative temporal (core) temperature decrease during cesarean delivery with spinal anesthesia., Methods: Secondary analysis of data derived from a prospective, randomized study of 46 healthy women undergoing scheduled cesarean delivery with spinal anesthesia was performed. Anterior thigh temperature was measured preoperatively prior to spinal anesthesia. The primary outcome was maximum perioperative temporal temperature decrease. Secondary outcomes included incidence of temporal hypothermia (temperature <36°C), shivering, and thermal comfort scores. This study ran concurrently with a previously published trial comparing no active intraoperative warming with active warming., Results: There was no correlation between preoperative anterior thigh temperature and maximum perioperative temporal temperature decrease (r=-0.049, P=0.751). The mean±standard deviation preoperative anterior thigh temperature of women who developed temporal hypothermia compared to those who did not was 32.4±0.8°C versus 32.4±0.70°C respectively (P=0.995). Preoperative anterior thigh temperature did not correlate with the incidence of shivering (r=0.267, P=0.080) or thermal comfort scores (r=0.233, P=0.129)., Conclusion: Preoperative anterior thigh temperature does not correlate with the degree of perioperative temporal temperature decrease, likelihood of developing hypothermia, shivering, or thermal comfort during cesarean delivery with spinal anesthesia. Although core-to-peripheral redistribution of heat after neuraxial anesthesia is a major mechanism of perioperative heat loss, a lower extremity temperature prediction hypothesis was not confirmed in this population., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The study aimed to determine whether a patient's choice for their intrathecal morphine (ITM) dose reflects their opioid requirements and pain after caesarean delivery and if giving women a choice of ITM dose would reduce opioid use and improve pain scores compared with women who did not have a choice., Methods: A total of 120 women undergoing caesarean delivery with spinal anaesthesia were enrolled in this randomized, double-blind study. Patients were randomly assigned to a choice of 100 or 200 μg ITM or no choice. The study involved deception, such that all participants were still randomly assigned 100 or 200 μg ITM regardless of choice. Rescue opioid use over the 48-h study period was the primary outcome measure. Pain at rest and movement and side effect (pruritus, nausea, and vomiting) data were collected 3, 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48 h postoperatively. Data are presented as median [95% confidence interval (CI)]., Results: Women who requested the larger ITM dose required more supplemental opioid [median 0.8 (95% CI 0.4-1.3)] mg morphine equivalents at each assessment interval; P  < 0.001] and reported more pain with movement [median 1.2 (95% CI 0.5-1.9)] verbal numerical rating score of 0-10 points] than patients who requested the smaller ITM dose ( P  = 0.0008), regardless of the ITM dose given. There was no difference in opioid use whether the patient was offered a perceived choice or not., Conclusions: Women who were given a choice and chose the larger ITM dose correctly anticipated a greater postoperative opioid requirement and more pain compared with women who chose the smaller dose. Simply being offered a choice did not impact opioid use or pain scores after caesarean delivery., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01425762)., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Journal of Anaesthesia. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com)

Background: The study aim was to investigate internet use for obtaining information about epidurals for labor and delivery., Methods: Google Trends for US data was queried from 2004 to 2015 to find the most common searches and determine temporal trends. The Google Trends query used the term [epidural] and evaluated changes in search trends over time. Search comparisons were made for each year from 2004 to 2015, and three equal time epochs during the study period (2004-07, 2008-11, 2012-15) were compared. We also compared searches for epidurals with commonly searched birth-related terms., Results: Internet searches are increasing; there were 726000 searches for [epidural] in 2015. Search terms with the most significant growth in the past 4years (2012-15) were "birth with epidural," "pain after epidural," "labor without epidural," "epidural birth video," and "epidural vs natural". Searches for epidural side effects, risks, and pain on insertion were among the most common and were increasing most rapidly. Searches related to epidurals were more common than searches related to "natural births", "home births", and "labor pain", but were less common than searches for "midwives" or "doulas"., Conclusion: The findings provide an insight into internet use by those seeking information about labor analgesic options. Identifying the most common and rapidly increasing online search queries may guide physician-parturient interactions and online content creation, to address labor analgesic topics that most interest users., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Identifying pregnant women with sepsis is challenging because diagnostic clinical and laboratory criteria overlap with normal pregnant physiologic indices. Our primary study aim was to describe clinical and laboratory characteristics of women diagnosed with sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock. Our secondary aim was to determine positive predictive values for International Classification of Disease (ICD)-9 billing codes for sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock., Methods: After gaining Institutional Review Board approval, we identified women with ICD-9 codes for sepsis, severe sepsis and septic shock who were admitted to a single tertiary obstetric center from 2007-2013. Diagnoses were confirmed using criteria from the International Sepsis Definitions Conference report. Demographic, obstetric, vital signs and laboratory data were abstracted by medical chart review., Results: We identified 190 women with sepsis-related ICD-9 codes: of these, 35 (18%) women met the criteria for a clinical diagnosis of sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock. Twenty (57%) women had a sepsis-related diagnosis after cesarean delivery. Twenty-one (60%) women had one or more pre-existing medical conditions and 19 (54%) women had one or more obstetric-related conditions. The genital tract was the most common site of infection. We observed considerable heterogeneity in maternal vital signs and laboratory indices for women with ICD-9 codes for sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock. The positive predictive value for each sepsis-related ICD-9 code was low: 16% (95% CI 10 to 24%) for sepsis, 10% (95% CI 3 to 25%) for severe sepsis and 24% (95% CI 10 to 46%) for septic shock., Conclusion: We identified marked heterogeneity in patient characteristics, clinical features, laboratory indices and microbiological findings among cohorts of women diagnosed with maternal sepsis, severe sepsis or septic shock. Based on our findings, the incidence of maternal sepsis using ICD-9 codes may be significantly overestimated., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The aim of this impact study was to compare the analgesic efficacy and side effect profile of programmed intermittent epidural boluses (PIEB)+patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) to continuous epidural infusion (CEI)+PCEA for maintenance labor analgesia after the introduction of PIEB at our institution., Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis after replacing the background CEI with PIEB for our labor PCEA. Pre-change pump settings were CEI 12mL/h with PCEA (12mL bolus, lockout 15min); PIEB settings were a 9mL bolus every 45min with PCEA (10mL bolus, lockout 10min). We compared medical records of all women receiving epidural or combined spinal-epidural labor analgesia for vaginal delivery for two months before PIEB implementation to a two-month period of PIEB utilization following a five-month introductory familiarization period. The primary outcome was the proportion of women requiring rescue clinician boluses., Results: Fewer patients in the PIEB group required rescue clinician boluses compared to the CEI group (12% vs. 19%, P=0.012). Time to first rescue bolus request and total bolus dose were not different. Peak (median [IQR]) pain scores were 2[0-5] with CEI and 0[0-4] with PIEB. There was no difference in instrumental delivery rates., Conclusions: Using PIEB compared to CEI as the background maintenance epidural analgesia method in conjunction with PCEA reduced the number of women requiring clinician rescue boluses while providing comparable labor analgesia. The findings of this clinical care impact study confirm the results of randomized controlled studies and suggest PIEB may be a preferable technique to CEI for the maintenance of labor analgesia., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

This manuscript reviews the available literature on remifentanil patient-controlled intravenous analgesia in labor focusing on efficacy and safety. Remifentanil compares favorably to other potent systemic opioids but with fewer opioid-related neonatal effects. However, remifentanil provides modest and short-lasting labor analgesia that is consistently inferior when compared to neuraxial analgesia. The initial analgesic effect provided with remifentanil also diminishes as labor progresses. In several studies, remifentanil induced significant respiratory depressant effects in laboring women with episodes of desaturation, hypoventilation and even apnea. Given the safety concerns, we recommend that remifentanil patient-controlled intravenous analgesia should not be a routine analgesia technique during labor. In cases where neuraxial analgesia is refused or contraindicated and the use of remifentanil justified, continuous and careful monitoring is required to detect respiratory depression to provide safe care of both the pregnant woman and unborn child., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Checklists can optimize team performance during medical crises. However, there has been limited examination of checklist use during obstetric crises. In this simulation study we exposed multidisciplinary teams to checklist training to evaluate checklist use and team performance during a severe postpartum hemorrhage., Methods: Fourteen multidisciplinary teams participated in a postpartum hemorrhage simulation occurring after vaginal delivery. Before participating, each team received checklist training. The primary study outcome was whether each team used the checklist during the simulation. Secondary outcomes were the times taken to activate our institution-specific massive transfusion protocol and commence red blood cell transfusion, and whether a designated checklist reader was used., Results: The majority of teams (12/14 (86%)) used the checklist. Red blood cell transfusion was administered by all teams. The median [IQR] times taken to activate the massive transfusion protocol and transfuse red blood cells were 5min 14s [3:23-6:43] and 14min 40s [12:56-17:28], respectively. A designated checklist reader was used by 7/12 (58%) teams that used the checklist. Among teams that used a checklist with versus without a designated reader, we observed no differences in the times to activate the massive transfusion protocol or to commence red blood cell transfusion (P>0.05)., Conclusions: Although checklist training was effective in promoting checklist use, multidisciplinary teams varied in their scope of checklist use during a postpartum hemorrhage simulation. Future studies are required to determine whether structured checklist training can result in more standardized checklist use during a postpartum hemorrhage., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Perioperative warming is recommended for surgery under anaesthesia, however its role during Caesarean delivery remains unclear. This meta-analysis aimed to determine the efficacy of active warming on outcomes after elective Caesarean delivery., Methods: We searched databases for randomized controlled trials utilizing forced air warming or warmed fluid within 30 min of neuraxial anaesthesia placement. Primary outcome was maximum temperature change. Secondary outcomes included maternal (end of surgery temperature, shivering, thermal comfort, hypothermia) and neonatal (temperature, umbilical cord pH and Apgar scores) outcomes. Standardized mean difference/mean difference/risk ratio (SMD/MD/RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using random effects modelling (CMA, version 2, 2005)., Results: 13 studies met our criteria and 789 patients (416 warmed and 373 controls) were analysed for the primary outcome. Warming reduced temperature change (SMD -1.27°C [-1.86, -0.69]; P=0.00002); resulted in higher end of surgery temperatures (MD 0.43 °C [0.27, 0.59]; P<0.00001); was associated with less shivering (RR 0.58 [0.43, 0.79]; P=0.0004); improved thermal comfort (SMD 0.90 [0.36, 1.45]; P=0.001), and decreased hypothermia (RR 0.66 [0.50, 0.87]; P=0.003). Umbilical artery pH was higher in the warmed group (MD 0.02 [0, 0.05]; P=0.04). Egger's test (P=0.001) and contour-enhanced funnel plot suggest a risk of publication bias for the primary outcome of temperature change., Conclusions: Active warming for elective Caesarean delivery decreases perioperative temperature reduction and the incidence of hypothermia and shivering. These findings suggest that forced air warming or warmed fluid should be used for elective Caesarean delivery., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Journal of Anaesthesia. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Combination opioid-acetaminophen drugs are commonly used for pain management after cesarean delivery. The aim of this study was to determine if scheduled acetaminophen decreases opioid use compared to as-needed combination acetaminophen-opioid administration., Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of women who underwent cesarean delivery before and after a clinical practice change. All patients received spinal anesthesia containing intrathecal morphine 200μg and scheduled non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for 48h postoperatively. The first group (As-Needed Group, n=120) received combination oral opioid-acetaminophen analgesics as needed for breakthrough pain. The second group (Scheduled Group, n=120) received oral acetaminophen 650mg every 6h for 48h postoperatively with oral oxycodone administered as needed for breakthrough pain. The primary outcome was opioid use, measured in intravenous morphine mg equivalents, in the first 48h postoperatively., Results: The Scheduled Group used 9.1±2.1mg (95% CI 5.0-13.2) fewer intravenous morphine equivalents than the As-Needed Group (P <0.0001) over the study period. Fewer patients in the Scheduled Group exceeded acetaminophen 3g daily compared to the As-Needed Group (P=0.008). Pain scores were similar between study groups., Conclusions: After cesarean delivery, scheduled acetaminophen results in decreased opioid use and more consistent acetaminophen intake compared to acetaminophen administered as needed via combination acetaminophen-opioid analgesics, without compromising analgesia., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Intrathecal morphine-induced pruritus is a very common side-effect that is difficult to prevent or treat. Central and peripheral mechanisms are believed to be involved. The aim of this study was to determine if a peripherally acting, μ-opioid antagonist would reduce morphine-induced pruritus., Methods: We conducted a multicentre, randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled trial of women having elective Caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia with intrathecal morphine 100 μg. After delivery, participants received either subcutaneous methylnatrexone bromide 12 mg (MNTX group, n=69) or saline (placebo group, n=68). Pruritus, nausea, pain, analgesic use, and side-effects were assessed at 2, 4, 8, and 24 h. The primary outcome was the severity of pruritus (0-10 score)., Results: One hundred and thirty-seven women completed the study, with five major protocol violations. There was no statistically significant difference between the MNTX and placebo groups for the median (IQR) pruritus AUC scores [24 (9-47) vs 36 (11-68), median difference 8.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0-20, P=0.09] or the worst pruritus score [3 (2-7) vs 5 (2-6), median difference 1, 95% CI 0-2, P=0.24]. The incidence of pruritus was 84% in the MNTX group and 88% in the placebo group (P=0.48). Analgesic and gastrointestinal outcomes did not significantly differ between the groups., Conclusions: A single dose of subcutaneous methylnaltrexone bromide 12 mg did not reduce the overall severity or incidence of pruritus. In this study, treatment with a peripherally acting μ-opioid antagonist was generally ineffective against intrathecal morphine-induced pruritus, but a small clinical effect cannot be excluded., Clinical Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12611000345987)., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Journal of Anaesthesia. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Life-threatening anaphylaxis has been reported in women exposed to latex during surgery. We compared a written screening questionnaire to identify suspected latex sensitivity with a verbal inquiry used previously in a historical control group of women undergoing cesarean delivery to determine if the incidence of suspected latex anaphylaxis could be reduced., Methods: To identify suspected latex sensitivity among women undergoing elective cesarean delivery in a single-site tertiary unit, a nine-item written screening questionnaire was compared to historical use of a standard verbal inquiry "Are you allergic to medications or latex?". Women who had suspected latex sensitivity risk factors, or who had known latex allergy, underwent latex-free surgery. Women with suspected anaphylaxis during cesarean delivery were recommended to undergo allergen testing. The primary study outcome was suspected anaphylaxis incidence during the two periods: historical control January to December 2008, questionnaire March 2010 to April 2011., Results: The questionnaire identified suspected latex sensitivity in 66 of 453 women (14.6%) who completed the questionnaire. The standard verbal inquiry group had identified 12 of 460 women (2.6%) with self-reported latex sensitivity. The incidence of suspected anaphylaxis during cesarean delivery was significantly lower during the questionnaire period when compared to historical controls (3/516, 0.6% vs. 11/460, 2.4%, P=0.015). For both groups, 13 of 14 women (92.9%) with suspected latex anaphylaxis were contactable; five of 13 (38.5%) had undergone allergen testing and all were positive for latex., Conclusions: Use of the written screening questionnaire was associated with fewer cases of suspected anaphylaxis during cesarean delivery compared with the historical control. Most women with suspected anaphylaxis did not perform allergy testing; however, all who did were positive for latex., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Uterine atony (UA) is recognized as a leading cause of postpartum haemorrhage. However, knowledge of risk factors of haemorrhage-related morbidity among patients diagnosed with UA is uncertain. We investigated risk factors for haemorrhage-related morbidity among patients undergoing Caesarean delivery with UA., Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of data sourced from a 4-yr observational study at 19 US academic centres. Patients with UA were identified based on receiving methylergonovine or carboprost. Our primary outcome (haemorrhage-related morbidity) included a composite of intra- or postpartum transfusion; Caesarean hysterectomy; uterine or hypogastric artery ligation; intensive care admission for: pulmonary oedema, coagulopathy, adult respiratory distress syndrome, postoperative ventilation, or invasive line monitoring., Results: Among 57,182 patients who underwent Caesarean delivery, 2294 (4%) patients developed UA. Haemorrhage-related morbidity occurred in 450 (19.6%) patients with UA. The risk of haemorrhage-related morbidity was increased among African-Americans [adjusted odds ratio (aOR)=2.36; 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.73-3.23], Hispanics (aOR=1.4; 95% CI=1.04-1.9), women with multiple gestations (aOR=1.59; 95% CI=1.06-2.38), placenta praevia (aOR=4.89; 95% CI=3.04-7.87), patients with ASA class III (aOR=1.4; 95 CI=1.03-1.9), or ASA class IV (aOR=5.88; 95% CI=2.48-13.9), exposure to general anaesthesia (GA) (aOR=2.4; 95% CI=1.59-3.62) and combined general and regional anaesthesia (aOR=4.0; 95% CI=2.62-6.09), and ≥2 prior Caesarean deliveries (aOR=1.62; 95% CI=1.1-2.39)., Conclusions: Among patients with UA undergoing Caesarean delivery, the risk of haemorrhage-related morbidity is increased in African-Americans, Hispanics, patients with multiple gestations, placenta praevia, ASA class III or IV, ≥2 prior Caesarean deliveries and those undergoing GA., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Journal of Anaesthesia. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Assessments of labour pain focus on pain intensity, not on duration. We aimed to assess the importance labouring women apply to pain intensity and duration before labour and post-delivery., Methods: Forty healthy women scheduled for labour induction were enrolled in this institutional review board-approved, prospective cohort study. Participants completed a pain preference questionnaire before active labour and within 24-h of delivery. The questionnaire consisted of seven stem questions that evaluated preference for pain intensity or duration. The pain preference ratio was determined by dividing the percentage of women who preferred reduced pain intensity for longer duration by that of those who preferred greater pain intensity for shorter duration (estimate of the odds). The overall hypothetical pain burden was determined by multiplying intensity by time. All questions presented the same overall hypothetical pain burden., Results: Pain preference questionnaire scores demonstrated preference for low intensity pain for a longer duration rather than higher intensity for a shorter duration, both pre-labour (P<0.001) and post-delivery (P<0.001): the null median imputed as 3 of 6 (i.e. no preference for pain intensity over pain duration). This preference for pain duration over intensity was greater post-delivery compared with before labour (P=0.03). There was a significant correlation (r=0.83; P=0.04) between the pain preference ratio vs overall hypothetical pain burden before labour but not after delivery (r=0.28; P=0.59)., Conclusions: In this preliminary labour assessment, women preferred lower pain intensity at the cost of longer pain duration. This suggests that pain intensity is the primary driver of hypothetical pain burden-a preference reinforced post-delivery., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Journal of Anaesthesia. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: The aims of this study were to assess racial/ethnic disparities for neuraxial labor analgesia utilization and to determine if preferred spoken language mediates the association between race/ethnicity and neuraxial labor analgesia utilization., Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of 3129 obstetric patients who underwent vaginal delivery at a tertiary care obstetric center. Bivariate analyses and multivariate logistic regression models were used to assess the relationships between race/ethnicity, preferred spoken language and neuraxial labor analgesia., Results: Hispanic ethnicity (adjusted OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.98) and multiparity (adjusted OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.51-0.69) were independently associated with a reduced likelihood of neuraxial labor analgesia utilization. When preferred spoken language was controlled for, the effect of Hispanic ethnicity was no longer significant (adjusted OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.66-1.08) and only non-English preferred spoken language (adjusted OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67-0.99) and multiparity (adjusted OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.51-0.69) were associated with a reduced likelihood of neuraxial labor analgesia utilization., Conclusions: This study provides evidence that preferred spoken language mediates the relationship between Hispanic ethnicity and neuraxial labor analgesia utilization., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: We studied the overlap between the major (epi)genomic events microsatellite instability (MSI), the CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP) and chromosomal instability (CIN) in colorectal cancer (CRC), and whether specific (epi)genotypes were associated with CRC-related deaths., Patients and Methods: Molecular analyses using tumor DNA were successful in 509 CRC cases identified within the Netherlands Cohort Study in the period 1989-1993. Follow-up for the vital status until May 2005 was 100%., Results: MSI (12.6%), CIMP-only (5.3%), CIMP + CIN (13.4%), CIN-only (58.2%) and triple-negative tumors (10.6%) differed significantly regarding tumor localization, differentiation grade, initial adjuvant therapy (AT) use and genetic characteristics (P ≤ 0.03). CIMP-only, CIMP + CIN and triple-negative tumors, compared with CIN-only tumors, were significantly associated with a 3.67, 2.44 and 3.78-fold risk of CRC-related deaths after 2-year follow-up (95% confidence intervals, CIs, 1.70-7.91, 1.35-4.41 and 1.97-7.25, respectively), but not after late follow-up. MSI tumors were borderline significantly associated with a 0.40-fold risk of CRC-related deaths after late follow-up (95% CI 0.15-1.03)., Conclusion(s): This is the first study to show that specific (epi)genotypes may hold a differential prognostic value that may vary over time. Although no specific treatment data were available, an explanation for the differential findings over time might be that (epi)genotypes modify therapy response.