Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Obstetrics and Obstetric Anesthesia in the United States

Racism and Inequities in Maternal Health

Racial inequities in maternal care persist despite decades of enhanced focus on understanding why they exist. Anesthesiologists are ideally positioned to influence Black women's and birthing people's care through their near-ubiquitous presence in many labor and delivery environments. Through intentionally addressing drivers of increased maternal morbidity and mortality, such as inequities in labor analgesia and anesthesia and postpartum pain management, anesthesiologists have a powerful role in changing lives.

Racial/Ethnic Inequities in Pregnancy-Related Morbidity and Mortality

Racism in America has deep roots that impact maternal health, particularly through pervasive inequities among Black women as compared with White, although other racial and ethnic groups also suffer. Health care providers caring for pregnant women are optimally positioned to maintain vigilance for these disparities in maternal care, and to intervene with their diverse skillsets and knowledge. By increasing awareness of how structural racism drives inequities in health, these providers can encourage hospitals and practices to develop and implement national bundles for patient safety, and use bias training and team-based training practices aimed at improving care for racially diverse mothers.

Racial Differences in Pregnancy-Related Morbidity and Mortality

Racism in the United States has deep roots that affect maternal health, particularly through pervasive inequalities among black women compared with white. Anesthesiologists are optimally positioned to maintain vigilance for these disparities in maternal care, and to intervene with their unique acute critical care skills and knowledge. As leaders in patient safety, anesthesiologists should drive hospitals and practices to develop and implement national bundles for patient safety, as well as using team-based training practices designed to improve hospitals that care for racially diverse mothers.

Sex/gender and additional equity characteristics of providers and patients in perioperative anesthesia trials: a cross-sectional analysis of the literature

Sex and gender, among other equity-related characteristics, influence the process of care and patients’ outcomes. Currently, the extent to which these characteristics are considered in the anesthesia literature remains unknown. This study assesses their incorporation in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on anesthesia-related interventions, for both patients and healthcare providers. This is a cross-sectional analysis using an existing dataset derived from the anesthesia literature. The dataset originated from a scoping review searching MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews. RCTs investigating the effect of anesthesia-related interventions on mortality for adults undergoing surgery were included. Equity outcome measures were recorded for both patients and providers and assessed for inclusion in the study design, reporting of results, and analysis of intervention effects. Three-hundred sixty-one RCTs (n = 144,674) were included. Most RCTs (91%) reported patient sex/gender, with 58% of patients identified as male. There were 139 studies (39%), where 70% or more of the sample was male, compared to just 14 studies (4%), where 70% or more of the sample was female. Only 10 studies (3%) analyzed results by patient sex/gender, with one reporting a significant effect. There was substantial variation in how age was reported, although nearly all studies (98%) reported some measure of age. For healthcare providers, equity-related information was never available. Better consideration of sex/gender and additional health equity parameters for both patients and providers in RCTs is needed to improve evidence quality, and ultimately, patient care and outcome.

United States State-Level Variation in the Use of Neuraxial Analgesia During Labor for Pregnant Women

IMPORTANCE

Neuraxial labor analgesia is recognized as the most effective method of providing pain relief during labor. Little is known about variation in the rates of neuraxial analgesia across US states. Identifying the presence and extent of variation may provide insights into practice variation and may indicate where access to neuraxial analgesia is inadequate.

OBJECTIVE

To test the hypothesis that variation exists in neuraxial labor analgesia use among US states.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Retrospective, population-based, cross-sectional analysis using US birth certificate data. Participants were 2 625 950 women who underwent labor in 2015.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

State-specific prevalence of neuraxial analgesia per 100 women who underwent labor and variability in neuraxial analgesia use among states, assessed using multilevel multivariable regression modeling with the median odds ratio and the intraclass correlation coefficient to evaluate variation by state.

RESULTS

In the study population of 2 625 950 women, 0.1% (n = 2010) were younger than 15 years, 7.0% (n = 183 546) were between the ages of 15 and 19 years, 23.6% (n = 620 118) were between the ages of 20 and 24 years, 29.6% (n = 777 957) were between the ages of 25 and 29 years, 26.0% (n = 683 656) were between the ages of 30 and 34 years, 11.4% (n = 298 237) were between the ages of 35 and 39 years, 2.2% (n = 57 130) were between the ages of 40 and 44 years, and 0.1% (n = 3296) were between the ages of 45 and 54 years. More than 90% were privately insured or insured with Medicaid. Neuraxial analgesia was used by 73.1% (n = 1 920 368) of women. After adjustment for antepartum, obstetric, and intrapartum factors, Maine had the lowest neuraxial analgesia prevalence (36.6%; 95% CI, 33.2%-40.1%) and Nevada the highest (80.1%; 95% CI, 78.3%-81.7%). The adjusted median odds ratio was 1.5 (95% CI, 1.4-1.6), and the intraclass correlation coefficient was 5.4% (95% CI, 4.0%-7.9%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Results of this study suggest that a small portion of the overall variation in neuraxial analgesia use is explained by US states. Unmeasured patient-level and hospital-level factors likely account for a large portion of the variation between states. Efforts should be made to understand what the main reasons are for this variation and whether the variation influences maternal or perinatal outcomes.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Mode of Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery

BACKGROUND

Racial and ethnic disparities have been identified in the provision of neuraxial labor analgesia. These disparities may exist in other key aspects of obstetric anesthesia care. We sought to determine whether racial/ethnic disparities exist in mode of anesthesia for cesarean delivery (CD).

METHODS

Women who underwent CD between 1999 and 2002 at 19 different obstetric centers in the United States were identified from the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network Cesarean Registry. Race/ethnicity was categorized as: Caucasian, African American, Hispanic, and Non-Hispanic Others (NHOs). Mode of anesthesia was classified as neuraxial anesthesia (spinal, epidural, or combined spinal-epidural anesthesia) or general anesthesia. To account for obstetric and non-obstetric covariates that may have influenced mode of anesthesia, multiple logistic regression analyses were performed by using sequential sets of covariates.

RESULTS

The study cohort comprised 50,974 women who underwent CD. Rates of general anesthesia among racial/ethnic groups were as follows: 5.2% for Caucasians, 11.3% for African Americans, 5.8% for Hispanics, and 6.6% for NHOs. After adjustment for obstetric and non-obstetric covariates, African Americans had the highest odds of receiving general anesthesia compared with Caucasians (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5-1.8; P < 0.001). The odds of receiving general anesthesia were also higher among Hispanics (aOR = 1.1; 95% CI, 1.0-1.3; P = 0.02) and NHOs (aOR = 1.2; 95% CI, 1.0-1.4; P = 0.03) compared with Caucasians, respectively. In our sensitivity analysis, we reconstructed the models after excluding women who underwent neuraxial anesthesia before general anesthesia. The adjusted odds of receiving general anesthesia were similar to those in the main analysis: African Americans (aOR = 1.7; 95% CI, 1.5-1.9; P < 0.001); Hispanics (aOR = 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.4; P = 0.006); and NHOs (aOR = 1.2; 95% CI, 1.0-1.5; P = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on data from the Cesarean Registry, African American women had the highest odds of undergoing general anesthesia for CD compared with Caucasian women. It is uncertain whether this disparity exists in current obstetric practice.

Mode of anaesthesia for preterm Caesarean delivery: secondary analysis from the Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network Caesarean Registry

BACKGROUND

Preterm delivery is often performed by Caesarean section. We investigated modes of anaesthesia and risk factors for general anaesthesia among women undergoing preterm Caesarean delivery.

METHODS

Women undergoing Caesarean delivery between 24(+0) and 36(+6) weeks' gestation were identified from a multicentre US registry. The mode of anaesthesia was classified as neuraxial anaesthesia (spinal, epidural, or combined spinal and epidural) or general anaesthesia. Logistic regression was used to identify patient characteristic, obstetric, and peripartum risk factors associated with general anaesthesia.

RESULTS

Within the study cohort, 11 539 women had preterm Caesarean delivery; 9510 (82.4%) underwent neuraxial anaesthesia and 2029 (17.6%) general anaesthesia. In our multivariate model, African-American race [adjusted odds ratio (aOR)=1.9; 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.7-2.2], Hispanic ethnicity (aOR=1.5; 95% CI=1.2-1.8), other race (aOR=1.4; 95% CI=1.1-1.9), and haemolysis, elevated liver enzymes and low platelets (HELLP) syndrome or eclampsia (aOR=2.8; 95% CI=2.2-3.5) were independently associated with receiving general anaesthesia for preterm Caesarean delivery. Women with an emergency Caesarean delivery indication had the highest odds for general anaesthesia (aOR=3.5; 95% CI=3.1-3.9). For every 1 week decrease in gestational age at delivery, the adjusted odds of general anaesthesia increased by 13%.

CONCLUSIONS

In our study cohort, nearly one in five women received general anaesthesia for preterm Caesarean delivery. Although potential confounding by unmeasured factors cannot be excluded, our findings suggest that early gestational age at delivery, emergent Caesarean delivery indications, hypertensive disease, and non-Caucasian race or ethnicity are associated with general anaesthesia for preterm Caesarean delivery.