Original ArticleAn observational study of anaesthesia and surgical time in elective caesarean section: spinal compared with general anaesthesia
Introduction
The caesarean delivery rate has been increasing steadily over the past decade with the current trend favouring neuraxial over general anaesthesia, because of the fear of airway complications with the latter.[1], [2], [3] Nevertheless, there is a concern that spinal anaesthesia may take too long to perform and is associated with a known failure rate.[4], [5]
In our hospital, time constraints are the main problem when planning a neuraxial technique even for elective caesarean section. Obstetricians believe that neuraxial techniques take more time in preparation and administration, thereby leading to longer operating room presence, slower patient turnover and fewer cases performed during working hours. Moreover, obstetricians complain that due to the large time gap between spinal induction and surgical incision, the interval when the fetus is not monitored may be extended. These general impressions cause obstetricians to counsel their patients that they should receive general anaesthesia. The lack of patient awareness and education in our part of the world leads to fear of complications such as paralysis with neuraxial techniques and complete reliance on the obstetrician to make decisions. A secondary result of these impressions is that our trainees have less experience with neuraxial techniques than those in the US and UK,[6], [7] possibly more in line with those in France over ten years ago, one study reporting a marginally higher rate of general than for neuraxial anaesthesia for scheduled caesarean section (49.7% vs. 48.4%).8 The authors stated that the time-saving aspect of general anaesthesia was probably an important factor in this choice.8
The aim of our audit was to observe the effect of spinal vs. general anaesthesia on the times for surgical readiness and total operating room presence.
Section snippets
Methods
This prospective, observational study examined elective caesarean sections performed under spinal or general anaesthesia from November 2005 through April 2006. We included all ASA I or ASA II patients. Six categories of practitioners provided anaesthesia: residents from level one to four (R1-R4), fellows/instructors and consultants. A second anaesthetist not involved in performing the clinical procedure collected the following times (recorded according to the operating room wall clock):
- 1.
Arrival
Results
During the six-month study period, a total of 245 patients were anaesthetised for elective caesarean section in the obstetric operating room and all were included in our study, with 104 receiving general and 141 receiving spinal anaesthesia. Most of the anaesthetics were performed by level R2 residents (Table 2) with no difference between levels of anaesthetist in the type of anaesthesia used.
Although anaesthesia time, time to surgical readiness and surgical time were significantly shorter with
Discussion
There is a widespread perception that anaesthesiologists can decrease operating room costs and time by working more quickly. Dexter and Macario,9 using a Monte-Carlo computer simulation, showed that decreasing case duration by anaesthetic or surgical interventions is unlikely to create sufficient operating room time to permit an additional case to be completed during working hours. Our findings support those of Dexter et al.,10 which showed that decreasing case duration of all cases in an
References (14)
- et al.
Failed intubation revisited: 17-yr experience in teaching maternity unit
Br J Anaesth
(1996) - et al.
Time required for surgical readiness in emergency caesarean section: spinal compared with general anaesthesia
Int J Obstet Anesth
(2003) - et al.
Vanishing experience in training for obstetric general anaesthesia: an observational study
Int J Obstet Anesth
(2008) - et al.
Anesthesia and analgesia practice patterns in French obstetrical patients
Ann Fr Anesth Reanim
(1998) - et al.
Prospective 12 months study of 30 minutes decision to delivery intervals for ‘emergency’ caesarean section
BMJ
(2001) - et al.
Anesthesia for vascular surgery of the lower extremities; one approach at Mount Sinai Hospital, New York
- et al.
A retrospective study of the incidence and causes of failed spinal anesthetics in university hospital
Anesth Analg
(1985)
Cited by (13)
Life cycle assessment perspectives on delivering an infant in the US
2012, Science of the Total EnvironmentCitation Excerpt :Lighting information was obtained through the hospital lighting specifications. The machine loading was then multiplied by the study's assumed birth durations — 80 min for vaginal birth and 75 min for cesarean section birth (Ismail and Huda, 2009; Janakiraman et al., 2010; Jangsten et al., 2010). The USLCI 1.6 database process “Electricity, at grid, Eastern US/US” was modified to match Pennsylvania's electricity production mix, see Table 4.
The association between indications for cesarean delivery and surgery time
2024, International Journal of Gynecology and ObstetricsOnset Time of Spinal Anaesthesia in Pregnant Females in Knee-Chest Position: A Randomized Controlled Study
2022, Turkish Journal of Anaesthesiology and ReanimationNumerous Confounders Affecting the Alleged Association Between Cesarean Deliveries Under General Anesthesia and Autism Spectrum Disorder
2020, Journal of Autism and Developmental DisordersPlacental pathology: A review of placenta previa, placental abruption and placenta accreta
2019, Update in Anaesthesia