Contraindications to regional anaesthesia in obstetrics: a survey of German practice
Background We assessed current practice regarding indications and contraindications to regional analgesia and anaesthesia for labour and delivery in Germany. Methods Questionnaires were mailed to the directors of 918 German departments of anaesthesiology. Results A total of 397 completed replies wer...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of obstetric anesthesia 2007-10, Vol.16 (4), p.328-335 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 335 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 328 |
container_title | International journal of obstetric anesthesia |
container_volume | 16 |
creator | Stamer, U.M Stuber, F Wiese, R Wulf, H Meuser, T |
description | Background We assessed current practice regarding indications and contraindications to regional analgesia and anaesthesia for labour and delivery in Germany. Methods Questionnaires were mailed to the directors of 918 German departments of anaesthesiology. Results A total of 397 completed replies were received representing 41.3% of all deliveries in Germany. More than half of the respondents never perform spinal or epidural anaesthesia when the platelet count falls below 65 × 109 /L. Preeclampsia, which was not graded for severity, was considered an absolute contraindication to regional block by 15% and placenta praevia by 30% of respondents. If a woman had taken aspirin three days before, the numbers of respondents considering epidural anaesthesia contraindicated (40.2%) were nearly double those considering spinal anaesthesia contraindicated (21.7%) ( P < 0.001). For a platelet count of 79 × 109 /L, epidural anaesthesia was thought to be contraindicated by 37% and spinal anaesthesia by 22.2% ( P = 0.001). In departments with 1000 deliveries/year. Conclusion Clinical practice varies considerably in Germany. Concerns regarding the use of regional blockade were more prevalent in hospitals with small delivery units. Indications and contraindications are not consistent in Germany and some recommendations or guidelines are needed. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ijoa.2007.05.011 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68282439</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0959289X07001136</els_id><sourcerecordid>68282439</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c324t-d20322cfa2b22f5b1afdf0e35dbec9e1b478ec9e01d20cc4e3eea8cbead2f1d93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU9r3DAQxUVoabZJv0AOQafe7I4k_y2lEJYkLQR6aAK9CVkat3K80laSA_vtK7MLhR56mjn83mPmPUKuGJQMWPNhKu3kVckB2hLqEhg7IxtWC14I0VavyAb6ui941_84J29jnACgF13zhpyztuk7IfoNedx6l4KyzlitkvUu0uRpwJ95VTNVTmFMvzBaRa2jfogJU7A6fqSKxiW84IH6kd5j2ClH90HpZDVektejmiO-O80L8nR3-7j9Ujx8u_-6vXkotOBVKgwHwbkeFR84H-uBqdGMgKI2A-oe2VC13boAy6TWFQpE1ekBleEjM724IO-Pvvvgfy_5ULmzUeM8K4d-ibLpeMcrsYL8COrgYww4yn2wOxUOkoFcs5STXLOUa5YSapmzzKLrk_sy7ND8lZzCy8CnI4D5xxeLQUZt0Wk0NqBO0nj7f__P_8j1bF2uYX7GA8bJLyFXECWTkUuQ39c21zKhhVXeiD8Cu50a</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>68282439</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Contraindications to regional anaesthesia in obstetrics: a survey of German practice</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Stamer, U.M ; Stuber, F ; Wiese, R ; Wulf, H ; Meuser, T</creator><creatorcontrib>Stamer, U.M ; Stuber, F ; Wiese, R ; Wulf, H ; Meuser, T</creatorcontrib><description>Background We assessed current practice regarding indications and contraindications to regional analgesia and anaesthesia for labour and delivery in Germany. Methods Questionnaires were mailed to the directors of 918 German departments of anaesthesiology. Results A total of 397 completed replies were received representing 41.3% of all deliveries in Germany. More than half of the respondents never perform spinal or epidural anaesthesia when the platelet count falls below 65 × 109 /L. Preeclampsia, which was not graded for severity, was considered an absolute contraindication to regional block by 15% and placenta praevia by 30% of respondents. If a woman had taken aspirin three days before, the numbers of respondents considering epidural anaesthesia contraindicated (40.2%) were nearly double those considering spinal anaesthesia contraindicated (21.7%) ( P < 0.001). For a platelet count of 79 × 109 /L, epidural anaesthesia was thought to be contraindicated by 37% and spinal anaesthesia by 22.2% ( P = 0.001). In departments with <500 deliveries/year, reluctance to use regional blockade was more pronounced than in departments with >1000 deliveries/year. Conclusion Clinical practice varies considerably in Germany. Concerns regarding the use of regional blockade were more prevalent in hospitals with small delivery units. Indications and contraindications are not consistent in Germany and some recommendations or guidelines are needed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0959-289X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-3374</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ijoa.2007.05.011</identifier><identifier>PMID: 17698339</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Anesthesia & Perioperative Care ; Anesthesia Department, Hospital - standards ; Anesthesia, Conduction - utilization ; Anesthesia, Epidural - utilization ; Anesthesia, Obstetrical - utilization ; Contraindications ; Epidural analgesia ; Female ; Germany ; Health Care Surveys ; Humans ; Obstetrics ; Obstetrics - standards ; Obstetrics and Gynecology ; Practice Patterns, Physicians' - statistics & numerical data ; Pregnancy ; Pregnancy Complications ; Spinal anaesthesia ; Survey ; Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><ispartof>International journal of obstetric anesthesia, 2007-10, Vol.16 (4), p.328-335</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>2007 Elsevier Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c324t-d20322cfa2b22f5b1afdf0e35dbec9e1b478ec9e01d20cc4e3eea8cbead2f1d93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c324t-d20322cfa2b22f5b1afdf0e35dbec9e1b478ec9e01d20cc4e3eea8cbead2f1d93</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijoa.2007.05.011$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3549,27923,27924,45994</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17698339$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Stamer, U.M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stuber, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wiese, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wulf, H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meuser, T</creatorcontrib><title>Contraindications to regional anaesthesia in obstetrics: a survey of German practice</title><title>International journal of obstetric anesthesia</title><addtitle>Int J Obstet Anesth</addtitle><description>Background We assessed current practice regarding indications and contraindications to regional analgesia and anaesthesia for labour and delivery in Germany. Methods Questionnaires were mailed to the directors of 918 German departments of anaesthesiology. Results A total of 397 completed replies were received representing 41.3% of all deliveries in Germany. More than half of the respondents never perform spinal or epidural anaesthesia when the platelet count falls below 65 × 109 /L. Preeclampsia, which was not graded for severity, was considered an absolute contraindication to regional block by 15% and placenta praevia by 30% of respondents. If a woman had taken aspirin three days before, the numbers of respondents considering epidural anaesthesia contraindicated (40.2%) were nearly double those considering spinal anaesthesia contraindicated (21.7%) ( P < 0.001). For a platelet count of 79 × 109 /L, epidural anaesthesia was thought to be contraindicated by 37% and spinal anaesthesia by 22.2% ( P = 0.001). In departments with <500 deliveries/year, reluctance to use regional blockade was more pronounced than in departments with >1000 deliveries/year. Conclusion Clinical practice varies considerably in Germany. Concerns regarding the use of regional blockade were more prevalent in hospitals with small delivery units. Indications and contraindications are not consistent in Germany and some recommendations or guidelines are needed.</description><subject>Anesthesia & Perioperative Care</subject><subject>Anesthesia Department, Hospital - standards</subject><subject>Anesthesia, Conduction - utilization</subject><subject>Anesthesia, Epidural - utilization</subject><subject>Anesthesia, Obstetrical - utilization</subject><subject>Contraindications</subject><subject>Epidural analgesia</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Germany</subject><subject>Health Care Surveys</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Obstetrics</subject><subject>Obstetrics - standards</subject><subject>Obstetrics and Gynecology</subject><subject>Practice Patterns, Physicians' - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Pregnancy Complications</subject><subject>Spinal anaesthesia</subject><subject>Survey</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><issn>0959-289X</issn><issn>1532-3374</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU9r3DAQxUVoabZJv0AOQafe7I4k_y2lEJYkLQR6aAK9CVkat3K80laSA_vtK7MLhR56mjn83mPmPUKuGJQMWPNhKu3kVckB2hLqEhg7IxtWC14I0VavyAb6ui941_84J29jnACgF13zhpyztuk7IfoNedx6l4KyzlitkvUu0uRpwJ95VTNVTmFMvzBaRa2jfogJU7A6fqSKxiW84IH6kd5j2ClH90HpZDVektejmiO-O80L8nR3-7j9Ujx8u_-6vXkotOBVKgwHwbkeFR84H-uBqdGMgKI2A-oe2VC13boAy6TWFQpE1ekBleEjM724IO-Pvvvgfy_5ULmzUeM8K4d-ibLpeMcrsYL8COrgYww4yn2wOxUOkoFcs5STXLOUa5YSapmzzKLrk_sy7ND8lZzCy8CnI4D5xxeLQUZt0Wk0NqBO0nj7f__P_8j1bF2uYX7GA8bJLyFXECWTkUuQ39c21zKhhVXeiD8Cu50a</recordid><startdate>200710</startdate><enddate>200710</enddate><creator>Stamer, U.M</creator><creator>Stuber, F</creator><creator>Wiese, R</creator><creator>Wulf, H</creator><creator>Meuser, T</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200710</creationdate><title>Contraindications to regional anaesthesia in obstetrics: a survey of German practice</title><author>Stamer, U.M ; Stuber, F ; Wiese, R ; Wulf, H ; Meuser, T</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c324t-d20322cfa2b22f5b1afdf0e35dbec9e1b478ec9e01d20cc4e3eea8cbead2f1d93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Anesthesia & Perioperative Care</topic><topic>Anesthesia Department, Hospital - standards</topic><topic>Anesthesia, Conduction - utilization</topic><topic>Anesthesia, Epidural - utilization</topic><topic>Anesthesia, Obstetrical - utilization</topic><topic>Contraindications</topic><topic>Epidural analgesia</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Germany</topic><topic>Health Care Surveys</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Obstetrics</topic><topic>Obstetrics - standards</topic><topic>Obstetrics and Gynecology</topic><topic>Practice Patterns, Physicians' - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Pregnancy Complications</topic><topic>Spinal anaesthesia</topic><topic>Survey</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Stamer, U.M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stuber, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wiese, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wulf, H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meuser, T</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>International journal of obstetric anesthesia</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Stamer, U.M</au><au>Stuber, F</au><au>Wiese, R</au><au>Wulf, H</au><au>Meuser, T</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Contraindications to regional anaesthesia in obstetrics: a survey of German practice</atitle><jtitle>International journal of obstetric anesthesia</jtitle><addtitle>Int J Obstet Anesth</addtitle><date>2007-10</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>328</spage><epage>335</epage><pages>328-335</pages><issn>0959-289X</issn><eissn>1532-3374</eissn><abstract>Background We assessed current practice regarding indications and contraindications to regional analgesia and anaesthesia for labour and delivery in Germany. Methods Questionnaires were mailed to the directors of 918 German departments of anaesthesiology. Results A total of 397 completed replies were received representing 41.3% of all deliveries in Germany. More than half of the respondents never perform spinal or epidural anaesthesia when the platelet count falls below 65 × 109 /L. Preeclampsia, which was not graded for severity, was considered an absolute contraindication to regional block by 15% and placenta praevia by 30% of respondents. If a woman had taken aspirin three days before, the numbers of respondents considering epidural anaesthesia contraindicated (40.2%) were nearly double those considering spinal anaesthesia contraindicated (21.7%) ( P < 0.001). For a platelet count of 79 × 109 /L, epidural anaesthesia was thought to be contraindicated by 37% and spinal anaesthesia by 22.2% ( P = 0.001). In departments with <500 deliveries/year, reluctance to use regional blockade was more pronounced than in departments with >1000 deliveries/year. Conclusion Clinical practice varies considerably in Germany. Concerns regarding the use of regional blockade were more prevalent in hospitals with small delivery units. Indications and contraindications are not consistent in Germany and some recommendations or guidelines are needed.</abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>17698339</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ijoa.2007.05.011</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0959-289X |
ispartof | International journal of obstetric anesthesia, 2007-10, Vol.16 (4), p.328-335 |
issn | 0959-289X 1532-3374 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68282439 |
source | MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
subjects | Anesthesia & Perioperative Care Anesthesia Department, Hospital - standards Anesthesia, Conduction - utilization Anesthesia, Epidural - utilization Anesthesia, Obstetrical - utilization Contraindications Epidural analgesia Female Germany Health Care Surveys Humans Obstetrics Obstetrics - standards Obstetrics and Gynecology Practice Patterns, Physicians' - statistics & numerical data Pregnancy Pregnancy Complications Spinal anaesthesia Survey Surveys and Questionnaires |
title | Contraindications to regional anaesthesia in obstetrics: a survey of German practice |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T23%3A26%3A24IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Contraindications%20to%20regional%20anaesthesia%20in%20obstetrics:%20a%20survey%20of%20German%20practice&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20obstetric%20anesthesia&rft.au=Stamer,%20U.M&rft.date=2007-10&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=328&rft.epage=335&rft.pages=328-335&rft.issn=0959-289X&rft.eissn=1532-3374&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ijoa.2007.05.011&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E68282439%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=68282439&rft_id=info:pmid/17698339&rft_els_id=S0959289X07001136&rfr_iscdi=true |