A retrospective cohort study of the anesthetic management of postpartum tubal ligation

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.

Ethnicity, socio-economic deprivation and postpartum outcomes following caesarean delivery: a multicentre cohort study

Disparities relating to postpartum recovery outcomes in different socio-economic and racial ethnic groups are underexplored. We conducted a planned analysis of a large prospective caesarean delivery cohort to explore the relationship between ethnicity, socio-economic status and postpartum recovery. Eligible patients were enrolled and baseline demographic, obstetric and medical history data were collected 18 h and 30 h following delivery. Patients completed postpartum quality of life and recovery measures in person on day 1 (EuroQoL EQ-5D-5L, including global health visual analogue scale; Obstetric Quality of Recovery-10 item score; and pain scores) and by telephone between day 28 and day 32 postpartum (EQ-5D-5L and pain scores). Socio-economic group was determined according to the Index of Multiple Deprivation quintile of each patient's usual place of residence. Data from 1000 patients who underwent caesarean delivery were included. There were more patients of Asian, Black and mixed ethnicity in the more deprived quintiles. Patients of White ethnicities had shorter postpartum duration of hospital stay compared with patients of Asian and Black ethnicities (35 (28-56 [18-513]) h vs. 44 (31-71 [19-465]) h vs. 49 (33-75 [23-189]) h, respectively. In adjusted models at day 30, patients of Asian ethnicity had a significantly greater risk of moderate to severe pain (numerical rating scale ≥ 4) at rest and on movement (odds ratio (95%CI) 2.42 (1.24-4.74) and 2.32 (1.40-3.87)), respectively). There were no differences in readmission rates or incidence of complications between groups. Patients from White ethnic backgrounds experience shorter postpartum duration of stay compared with patients from Asian and Black ethnic groups. Ethnic background impacts pain scores and recovery at day 1 postpartum and following hospital discharge, even after adjusting for socio-economic group. Further work is required to understand the underlying factors driving differences in pain and recovery and to develop strategies to reduce disparities in obstetric patients.

Outcomes and outcome measures utilised in randomised controlled trials of postoperative caesarean delivery pain: a scoping review

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.

Prevalence and predictors for postpartum sleep disorders: a nationwide analysis

OBJECTIVE

To describe the prevalence and predictors of postpartum sleep disorders.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Postpartum.

POPULATION

Commercially insured women delivering in California (USA) between 2011 and 2014.

METHODS

Using the Optum Clinformatics Datamart Database.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Prevalence of a postpartum sleep disorder diagnosis with and without a depression diagnosis up to 12 months following hospital discharge for inpatient delivery. We also identified predictors of a postpartum sleep disorder diagnosis using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

We identified 3535 (1.9%) women with a postpartum sleep disorder diagnosis. The prevalence of sleep disorder diagnoses was insomnia (1.3%), sleep apnea (0.25%), and other sleep disorder (0.25%). The odds of a postpartum sleep disorder were highest among women with a history of drug abuse (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 2.70, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.79-4.09); a stillbirth delivery (aOR: 2.15, 95% CI: 1.53-3.01); and chronic hypertension (aOR: 1.82; 95% CI: 1.57-2.11). A comorbid diagnosis of a postpartum sleep disorder and depression occurred in 1182 women (0.6%). These women accounted for 33.4% of all women with a postpartum sleep disorder. The strongest predictors of a comorbid diagnosis were a history of drug abuse (aOR: 4.13; 95% CI: 2.37-7.21) and a stillbirth delivery (aOR: 2.93; 95% CI: 1.74-4.92).

CONCLUSIONS

Postpartum sleep disorders are underdiagnosed conditions, with only 2% of postpartum women in this cohort receiving a sleep diagnosis using International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes. Insomnia was the most common disorder and one-third of women diagnosed with a postpartum sleep disorder had a co-morbid diagnosis of depression. Future studies are needed to improve the screening and diagnostic accuracy of postpartum sleep disorders.

Quality of recovery following childbirth: a prospective, multicentre cohort study

To better understand outcomes in postpartum patients who receive peripartum anaesthetic interventions, we aimed to assess quality of recovery metrics following childbirth in a UK-based multicentre cohort study. This study was performed during a 2-week period in October 2021 to assess in- and outpatient post-delivery recovery at 1 and 30 days postpartum. The following outcomes were reported: obstetric quality of recovery 10-item measure (ObsQoR-10); EuroQoL (EQ-5D-5L) survey; global health visual analogue scale; postpartum pain scores at rest and movement; length of hospital stay; readmission rates; and self-reported complications. In total, 1638 patients were recruited and responses analysed from 1631 (99.6%) and 1282 patients (80%) at one and 30 days postpartum, respectively. Median (IQR [range]) length of stay postpartum was 39.3 (28.5-61.0 [17.7-513.4]), 40.3 (28.5-59.1 [17.8-220.9]), and 35.9 (27.1-54.1 [17.9-188.4]) h following caesarean, instrumental and vaginal deliveries, respectively. Median (IQR [range]) ObsQoR-10 score was 75 ([62-86] 4-100) on day 1, with the lowest ObsQoR-10 scores (worst recovery) reported by patients undergoing caesarean delivery. Of the 1282 patients, complications within the first 30 days postpartum were reported by 252 (19.7%) of all patients. Readmission to hospital within 30 days of discharge occurred in 69 patients (5.4%), with 49 (3%) for maternal reasons. These data can be used to inform patients regarding expected recovery trajectories; facilitate optimal discharge planning; and identify populations that may benefit most from targeted interventions to improve postpartum recovery experience.

The multitarget fecal immunochemical test versus the fecal immunochemical test for programmatic colorectal cancer screening: a cross-sectional intervention study with paired design

BACKGROUND

Many screening programs for colorectal cancer (CRC) use the fecal immunochemical test (FIT) to triage individuals for colonoscopy. Although these programs reduce CRC incidence and CRC-related mortality, the detection of advanced precursor lesions (advanced adenomas and advanced serrated polyps) by FIT could be improved. As an alternative for FIT, the antibody-based multitargetFIT (mtFIT) has been proposed. The mtFIT measures three protein markers: hemoglobin, calprotectin, and serpin family F member 2. In a retrospective diagnostic accuracy study in a large colonoscopy-controlled series (n = 1284), mtFIT showed increased sensitivity for advanced neoplasia (AN), at equal specificity, compared to FIT (42.9% versus 37.3%; p = 0.025). This increase was mainly due to a higher sensitivity of mtFIT for advanced adenomas (37.8% versus 28.1% for FIT; p = 0.006). The present mtFIT study aims to prospectively validate these findings in the context of the Dutch national CRC screening program.

METHOD

The mtFIT study is a cross-sectional intervention study with a paired design. Eligible subjects for the Dutch FIT-based national CRC screening program are invited to perform mtFIT in addition to FIT. Samples are collected at home, from the same bowel movement, and are shipped to a central laboratory by postal mail. If either one or both tests are positive, participants are referred for colonoscopy. Detailed colonoscopy and pathology data are centrally stored in a national screening database (ScreenIT; Topicus, Deventer, the Netherlands) that is managed by the screening organization, and will be retrieved for this study. We aim to determine the relative sensitivity for AN, comprising of CRC, advanced adenomas and advanced serrated polyps, of mtFIT compared to FIT at an equal positivity rate. Additionally, we will use the Adenoma and Serrated Pathway to Colorectal CAncer model to predict lifetime health effects and costs for programmatic mtFIT- versus FIT-based screening. The target sample size is 13,131 participants.

DISCUSSION

The outcome of this study will inform on the comparative clinical utility of mtFIT versus FIT in the Dutch national CRC screening program and is an important step forward in the development of a new non-invasive stool test for CRC screening.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov ; NCT05314309, registered April 6th 2022, first inclusions March 25th 2022 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=NCT05314309&cntry=&state=&city=&dist =.

Development and validation of a Portuguese version of Obstetric Quality of Recovery-10 (ObsQoR-10-Portuguese)

BACKGROUND

We aimed to develop and validate a Portuguese version of the Obstetric Quality of Recovery-10 (ObsQoR-10-Portuguese) patient-reported outcome measure and evaluate its psychometric properties.

METHODS

After ethical approval, we recruited term pregnant women undergoing uncomplicated elective cesarean delivery in a single Brazilian institution. Women were invited to complete the translated ObsQoR-10-Portuguese and EuroQoL (EQ-5D) questionnaires (including a global health visual analog scale [GHVAS]) at 24 h (±6 h) following delivery, and a subset of women an hour later. We assessed validity and reliability of ObsQoR-10-Portuguese.

RESULTS

One hundred thirteen enrolled women completed the surveys at 24 h and 29 women at 25 h (100% response rate).

VALIDITY

(i) convergent validity: ObsQoR-10-Portuguese correlated moderately with EuroQoL score (r = -0.587) and GHVAS score (r = 0.568) at 24 h. (ii) Discriminant validity: ObsQoR-10 discriminated well between good versus poor recovery (GHVAS score ≥ 70 versus < 70; difference in mean scores 14.2; p < 0.001). (iii) Hypothesis testing: 24-h ObsQoR-10-Portuguese scores correlated with gestational age (r = 0.191; p = 0.043). (iv) Cross-cultural validity: differential item functioning analysis suggested bias in 2 items. Reliability: (i) internal consistency was good (Cronbach's alpha = 0.82 and inter-item correlation = 0.31). (ii) Split-half reliability was very good (Spearman-Brown Prophesy Reliability Estimate = 0.80). (iii) Test re-test reliability was excellent (intra-class correlation coefficient = 0.87). (iv) Floor and ceiling effects: < 5% women scored either 0 or 100 (lowest and highest scores, respectively).

CONCLUSION

ObsQoR-10-Portuguese is valid and reliable, and should be considered for use in Portuguese-speaking women to assess their quality of inpatient recovery following cesarean delivery.

A randomized trial to investigate needle redirections/re-insertions using a handheld ultrasound device versus traditional palpation for spinal anesthesia in obese women undergoing cesarean delivery

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/m²) 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/m² and for the palpation group 37.3 (5.2) kg/m². There was no difference in the composite primary outcome (median (interquartile range) [range]) between the ultrasound group (4 (2-13) [2-22]) and the (6 (4-10) [1-17]) palpation group (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.

Proposed domains for assessing postpartum recovery: a concept elicitation study

OBJECTIVE

To propose postpartum recovery domains.

DESIGN

Concept elicitation study.

SETTING

Semi-structured interviews.

POPULATION

Ten writing committee members and 50 stakeholder interviews (23 postpartum women, nine general obstetricians, five maternal and fetal medicine specialists, eight nurses and five obstetric anaesthetists).

METHODS

Alternating interviews and focus group meetings until concept saturation was achieved (no new themes discussed in three consecutive interviews). Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed, and an iterative coding process was used to identify domains.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was to identify recovery domains. We also report key symptoms and concerns. Discussion frequency and importance scores (0-100; 0 = not important; 100 = vitally important to recovery) were used to rank domains. Discussion frequency was used to rank factors helping and hindering recovery, and to determine the greatest challenges experienced postpartum.

RESULTS

Thirty-four interviews and two focus group meetings were performed. The 13 postpartum recovery domains identified, (ranked highest to lowest) were: psychosocial distress, surgical/medical factors, infant feeding and breast health, psychosocial support, pain, physical function, sleep, motherhood experience, infant health, fatigue, appearance, sexual function and cognition. The most frequently discussed factors facilitating postpartum recovery were: family support, lactation/breastfeeding support and partner support. The most frequently discussed factor hindering recovery was inadequate social support. The most frequent challenges reported were: breastfeeding (week 1), breastfeeding (week 3) and sleep (week 6).

CONCLUSIONS

We propose 13 domains that comprehensively describe recovery in women delivering in a single centre within the USA. This provides a novel framework to study the postpartum recovery process.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

We propose 13 postpartum recovery domains that provide a framework to study the recovery process following childbirth.

A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures used to assess sleep in postpartum women using Consensus Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines

STUDY OBJECTIVES

We performed a systematic review to identify the best patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) of postpartum sleep in women.

METHODS

We searched 4 databases for validated PROMs used to assess postpartum sleep. Studies were considered if they evaluated at least 1 psychometric measurement property of a PROM. An overall rating was assigned for each psychometric measurement property of each PROM based upon COSMIN criteria. A modified GRADE approach was used to assess the level of evidence and recommendations were then made for each PROM.

RESULTS

We identified 15 validation studies of 8 PROMs, in 9,070 postpartum women. An adequate number of sleep domains was assessed by 5 PROMs: Bergen Insomnia Scale (BIS), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), General Sleep Disturbance Scale (GSDS), Athens Insomnia Scale (AIS) and the Sleep Symptom Checklist (SSC). BIS and GSDS were the only PROMs to demonstrate adequate content validity and at least a low level of evidence of sufficient internal consistency, resulting in Class A recommendations. The BIS was the only PROM, which is easily accessible and free to use for non-commercial research, that achieved a Class A recommendation.

CONCLUSION

The BIS is the best currently available PROM of postpartum sleep. However, this PROM fails to assess several important domains such as sleep duration (and efficiency), chronotype, sleep-disordered breathing and medication usage. Future studies should focus on evaluating the psychometric measurement properties of BIS in the North American setting and in different cultural groups, or to develop a more specific PROM of postpartum sleep.

Regional anaesthesia for labour, operative vaginal delivery and caesarean delivery: a narrative review

This narrative review discusses recent evidence surrounding the use of regional anaesthesia in the obstetric setting, including intrapartum techniques for labour and operative vaginal delivery, and caesarean delivery. Pudendal nerve blockade, ideally administered by an obstetrician, should be considered for operative vaginal delivery if neuraxial analgesia is contraindicated. Regional techniques are increasingly utilised in clinical practice for caesarean delivery to minimise opioid consumption, reduce pain, improve postpartum recovery and facilitate earlier discharge as part of enhanced recovery protocols. The evidence surrounding transversus abdominis plane and quadratus lumborum blockade supports their use when: long-acting neuraxial opioids cannot be administered due to contraindications; if emergency delivery necessitates general anaesthesia; or as a postoperative rescue technique. Current data suggest quadratus lumborum blockade is no more effective than transversus abdominis plane blockade after caesarean delivery. Transversus abdominis plane blockade, wound catheter insertion and single shot wound infiltration are all effective techniques for reducing postoperative opioid consumption, with transversus abdominis plane blockade favoured, followed by wound catheters and then wound infiltration. Ilio-inguinal and iliohypogastric, erector spinae plane and rectus sheath blockade all require further studies to determine their efficacy for caesarean delivery in the presence or absence of long-acting neuraxial opioids. Future studies are needed to: compare approaches for individual techniques; determine which combinations of techniques and dosing regimens result in optimal analgesic and recovery outcomes following delivery; and elucidate the populations that benefit most from regional anaesthesia in the obstetric setting.

Quadratus lumborum block vs. transversus abdominis plane block for caesarean delivery: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Anaesthesia 2020;76:393-403. [PMID: 32621529 DOI: 10.1111/anae.15160]

Caesarean delivery is the most commonly performed inpatient surgical procedure globally. Pain after caesarean delivery is moderate to severe if not adequately treated, and is a primary anaesthetic concern for patients. Transversus abdominis plane and quadratus lumborum blocks are fascial plane blocks that have the potential to improve analgesia following caesarean delivery. Although proponents of the quadratus lumborum block suggest that this technique may provide better analgesia compared with transversus abdominis plane block, there are limited data directly comparing these two techniques. We, therefore, performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to compare transversus abdominis plane and quadratus lumborum block approaches, seeking randomised controlled trials comparing both techniques to each other, or to control, with or without intrathecal morphine. In all, 31 trials with 2188 patients were included and our primary outcome, the cumulative intravenous morphine equivalent consumption at 24 h, was reported in 12 trials. In the absence of intrathecal morphine, transversus abdominis plane and quadratus lumborum blocks were equivalent, and both were superior to control (moderate-quality evidence). In the presence of intrathecal morphine, no differences were found between control, transversus abdominis plane and quadratus lumborum blocks (moderate-quality evidence). Similar results were found for resting and active pain scores at 4-6 h, 8-12 h, 24 h and 36 h, although quadratus lumborum block was associated with lower pain scores at 36 h when compared with transversus abdominis plane block (very low-quality evidence). However, transversus abdominis plane block was associated with a reduced incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (moderate-quality evidence) and sedation when compared with inactive control following intrathecal morphine administration (low-quality evidence). There are insufficient data to draw definitive conclusions, but transversus abdominis plane and quadratus lumborum block appear to be superior to control in the absence of intrathecal morphine, but provide limited additional benefit over inactive control when intrathecal morphine is also used.