Basak ALTİPARMAK, Sezen Bozkurt KOSEOGLU

Assessment of satisfaction and anxiety levels of the patients who had cesarean section with general and spinal anesthesia

The primary aim in our study is to obtain the most objective result by comparing the anesthesia satisfaction of women who had cesarean section both under general and spinal anesthesia. Our secondary aim is to assess the relation between patients’ preference of anesthesia technique and anxiety level. Total number of 94 ASA II women who hadcesarean section under general anesthesia within 5 years and scheduled to have elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia, were included into the study. After 48 hours, all of the patients were asked to compare their previous general anesthesia experience with spinal anesthesia in regard of satisfaction and anxiety. Satisfaction scores were as “bad”, “average”, “good”, “very good” while patients were asked to use numbers from 1 to 10 to score their anxiety level. The mean age of the patients was 26.1±4.5 when they had general anesthesia and it was 29.7±4.6 when they had spinal anesthesia. When the satisfaction scores of anesthesia techniques were compared, spinal anesthesia was found to be statistically significantly high (p0.05). The patients who had cesarean section under both of the anesthesia techniques were more satisfied by spinal anesthesia. While no difference was found between preoperative anxiety levels

PDF

___

1. Purtuloğlu T, Ozkan S, Teksöz E, Dere K, Şen H, Yen T, Dağlı G. Elektif sezaryen uygulanan olgularda genel ve spinal anestezinin maternal ve fetal etkilerinin karşılaştırılması. Gülhane Tıp Dergisi. 2008;50(2):91-7.

2. American Socirty of Anestesiologists Task Force on Obstetric Anesthesia. Practice guidelines for obstetric anesthesia: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Obstetric Anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 2007;106(4):843-63.

3. Campbell J, Sultan P. Regional anaesthesia for caesarean section: a choice of three techniques. Br J Hosp Med (Lond). 2009;70(10):605.

4. Gülhaş N, Şanlı M, Özgül Ü, Begeç Z, Durmuş M. Sezaryenlerde Anestezi Yönetimi: Retrospektif Değerlendirme. İnönü Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi. 2012;19(3):142-5.

5. Lertakyamanee J, Chinachoti T, Tritrakarn T, Muangkasem J, Somboonnanonda A, Kolatat T. Comparison of general and regional anesthesia for cesarean section: success rate, blood loss and satisfaction from a randomized trial. J Med Assoc Thai. 1999;82:672- 80.

6. Kocamanoğlu İS SB, Şener B, Tür A, Şahinoğlu H, Sunter T Sezaryen Operasyonlarında Uygulanan Anestezi Yöntemleri ve Komplikasyonları: 3552 Olgunun Retrospektif Değerlendirilmesi. Turkiye Klinikleri J Med Sciences. 2005;25(6):810-6.

7. Günüşen İ, Karaman S, Akercan F, Fırat V. Elektif sezaryenlerde farklı anestezi yöntemlerinin yenidoğan üzerine etkileri: retrospektif çalısma. Ege Tıp Dergisi. 2009;48(3):189-94.

8. Toker K, Yilmaz AS, Gürkan Y, Baykara N, Canatay H, Özdamar D, Yildiz TS. Anaesthesia for caesarean operations; a retrospective analysis of five years. Türk Anest Rean Cem Mecmuası. 2003;31(1):26-30.

9. Uysalel A, Ibrahim A, Çakar KS. Obstetrik ve jinekolojik cerrahide anestezi. Türkiye Klinikleri J Surg Med Sci. 2006;2(6):81-93.

10. McDonnell NJ, Paech MJ, Clavisi OM, Scott KL; ANZCA Trials Group. Difficult and failed intubation in obstetric anaesthesia: an observational study of airway management and complications associated with general anaesthesia for caesarean section. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2008;17(4):292-7.

11. Ozgen ZS, Toraman F, Erkek E, Sungur T, Guclu P, Durmaz S, Bilgili CO. Cesarean under general or epidural anesthesia: does it differ in terms of regional cerebral oxygenation? Acta Anaesthesiol Taiwan. 2014;52(4):159-62.

12. Afolabi BB, Lesi FE,. Regional versus general anaesthesia for caesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;17:10:CD004350.

13. Desalu I, KUSHİMO OT. Is ephedrine ınfusion more effective at preventing hypotension than traditional prehydration during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section in african parturients? Int J Obstet Anesth. 2005;14(4):294-9.

14. Klöhr S, Roth R, Hofmann T, Rossaint R, Heesen M. Definitions of hypotension after spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section: literature search and application to parturients. Acta anaesthesiol Scand. 2010;54(8):909-21.

15. Langesaeter E, Rosseland LA, Stubhaug A. Continuous invasive blood pressure and cardiac output monitoring during cesarean delivery: a randomized, double-blind comparison of low-dose versus high-dose spinal anesthesia with intravenous phenylephrine or placebo infusion. Anesthesiology. 2008;109(5):856-63.

16. Reidy J, Douglas J. Vasopressors in obstetrics. Anesthesiol Clin. 2008;26(1):75-88.

17. Dharmalingam TK, Ahmad Zainuddin NA. Survey on maternal satisfaction in receiving spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section. Malays J Med Sci. 2013;20(3):51-4.

18. Sahin S, Owen M. Obstetric Analgesia and Anaesthesia in Turkey and in the World. Anest Rean Cem Mecmuası. 2002;30(2):52-9.

19. Töre G Gurbet A, Şahin Ş, Türker G, Yavaşcaoğlu B, Korkmaz S. Türkiye'de Obstetrik Anestezi Uygulamalarındaki Değişimin Değerlendirilmesi. Türk Anest Rean Cem Mecmuası. 2009;37(2):86- 95.

20. Tekin İ, Laçin S, Arıcan İ, Ok G. Sezaryen Operasyonu Geçirmiş Olguların "Anestezi Yöntemi"nin Seçimi Üzerine Etkileri. Turkiye Klinikleri J Anest Reanim. 2005;3(1):1-6.

21. Eley VA, Searles T, Donovan K, Walters E. Effect of an anaesthesia information video on preoperative maternal anxiety and postoperative satisfaction in elective caesarean section: a prospective randomised trial Anaesthesia and intensive care. 2013;41(6):774-81.

22. Hemanth Kumar V, Jahaqirdar SM, Athiraman UK, Sripriya R, Parthasarathy S, Ravishankar M. Study of patient satisfaction and self-expressed problems after emergency caesarean delivery under subarachnoid block. Indian J Anaesth. 2014;58(2):149-53.