Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Obstetric Anesthesia

A National Survey
Authors: Ben M. Peckham; Thomas H. Kirschbaum; Harvey Sharp; Jeffrey P. Krischer; Charles P. Gibbs;

Obstetric Anesthesia

Abstract

To assess obstetric anesthesia in the United States, and to determine why more anesthesia personnel are not involved in this subspecialty, a questionnaire was sent to the heads of obstetric and anesthesia services in 1,200 hospitals. Both obstetric and anesthesia respondents agreed on several characteristics of obstetric anesthesia that inhibit more participation by anesthesia personnel. Among others, they identified that: the unpredictability of labor and delivery makes scheduling difficult; obstetricians tend to dictate type and timing of anesthesia; the risk of malpractice claims is increased for obstetric anesthesia; and, finally, larger obstetric services would make it more practical to provide anesthesia services. Regarding availability of personnel and procedures, obstetric units with less than 500 deliveries per year were considerably more under-staffed than the larger units in most areas studied. When general anesthesia was used for cesarean section in these units, it was provided by, or given under the direction of, an anesthesiologist only 44% of the time, whereas in the hospitals with more than 1,500 deliveries per year, an anesthesiologist was present 86% of the time. Likewise, in the small units, personnel classified as "others" were responsible for newborn resuscitation in 24% and 43% of instances after cesarean section and vaginal delivery, respectively. In the hospitals with more than 1,500 deliveries, comparable figures were 4% and 2%, respectively.

Keywords

Anesthesia, Epidural, Labor, Obstetric, Anesthesiology, Cesarean Section, Pregnancy, Workforce, Anesthesia, Obstetrical, Humans, Female, Anesthesia, Spinal

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    142
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 1%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
142
Top 10%
Top 1%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author? Do you have the OA version of this publication?