Carvalho, Brendan

BACKGROUND: Childbirth can have a substantial impact on maternal health-related quality of life. Cesarean delivery is the most performed inpatient operation, yet little is known about normal postpartum recovery profiles. The primary aim of our study was to longitudinally evaluate global health visual analog scale (GHVAS; 0–100) scores up to 12 weeks after scheduled cesarean delivery and identify the time to plateau of scores. The secondary aims were to evaluate different domains of postpartum recovery using validated patient-reported outcome measures (Obstetric Quality of Recovery score [ObsQoR-10] and 5-level 5-dimensional EuroQol questionnaire [EQ-5D]). METHODS: After institutional review board approval, this single-center, prospective longitudinal study enrolled healthy women scheduled for cesarean delivery. Women were excluded for gestational age <32 weeks, neonatal demise, neonatal intensive care unit admission, inability to read or understand English, and if general anesthesia was used. Women completed baseline surveys before delivery and then at 24 and 48 hours after delivery. After hospital discharge, women completed surveys (including GHVAS, OBsQoR-10, EQ-5D, Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale, and activities of daily living) at 1 week, 3 weeks, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks postpartum. One-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to detect the difference in GHVAS and postpartum recovery outcomes with different follow-up time points. RESULTS: We enrolled 66 parturients and 3 were withdrawn. Response rates were 95%, 84%, 83%, and 76% at 1, 3, 6, and 12 weeks, respectively. Mean ± standard deviation [SD] GHVAS scores were 78 ± 16 at baseline, 64 ± 17 at 24 hours, 69 ± 15 at 48 hours, 75 ± 19 at 1 week, 88 ± 11 at 3 weeks, 88 ± 15 at 6 weeks, and 90 ± 12 at 12 weeks postpartum ( P < .001). The global health VAS improved up until week 3 and then plateaued close to the maximum score between 3 weeks and 12 weeks postpartum. Mean ± SD ObsQoR-10 scores were 75 ± 15 at 24 hours, 85 ± 10 at 48 hours, and 81 ± 28 at 1 week postpartum ( P = .003). The mean ± SD EQ-5D composite scores improved at 6 weeks (4.9 ± 2.9) and 3 months (4.2 ± 2.6) compared to baseline (6.5 ± 1.8) with usual activities ( P = .001) and pain/discomfort ( P < .001) showing significant improvement over time. ObsQoR-10 score at 24 hours correlated with ObsQoR-10 scores at 48 hours (r = 0.629, P < .001) and 1 week (r = 0.429, P < .001) but did not correlate with EQ-5D scores at 6 weeks and 12 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that GHVAS after scheduled CD plateaus at week 3. This data can be used to inform patients about the anticipated trajectory of key postpartum recovery domains up to 12 weeks postpartum.

Background Inconsistent nomenclature and anatomical descriptions of regional anesthetic techniques hinder scientific communication and engender confusion; this in turn has implications for research, education and clinical implementation of regional anesthesia. Having produced standardized nomenclature for abdominal wall, paraspinal and chest wall regional anesthetic techniques, we aimed to similarly do so for upper and lower limb peripheral nerve blocks. Methods We performed a three-round Delphi international consensus study to generate standardized names and anatomical descriptions of upper and lower limb regional anesthetic techniques. A long list of names and anatomical description of blocks of upper and lower extremities was produced by the members of the steering committee. Subsequently, two rounds of anonymized voting and commenting were followed by a third virtual round table to secure consensus for items that remained outstanding after the first and second rounds. As with previous methodology, strong consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement and weak consensus as 50%–74% agreement. Results A total of 94, 91 and 65 collaborators participated in the first, second and third rounds, respectively. We achieved strong consensus for 38 names and 33 anatomical descriptions, and weak consensus for five anatomical descriptions. We agreed on a template for naming peripheral nerve blocks based on the name of the nerve and the anatomical location of the blockade and identified several areas for future research. Conclusions We achieved consensus on nomenclature and anatomical descriptions of regional anesthetic techniques for upper and lower limb nerve blocks, and recommend using this framework in clinical and academic practice. This should improve research, teaching and learning of regional anesthesia to eventually improve patient care.

Background There is heterogeneity in the names and anatomical descriptions of regional anesthetic techniques. This may have adverse consequences on education, research, and implementation into clinical practice. We aimed to produce standardized nomenclature for abdominal wall, paraspinal, and chest wall regional anesthetic techniques. Methods We conducted an international consensus study involving experts using a three-round Delphi method to produce a list of names and corresponding descriptions of anatomical targets. After long-list formulation by a Steering Committee, the first and second rounds involved anonymous electronic voting and commenting, with the third round involving a virtual round table discussion aiming to achieve consensus on items that had yet to achieve it. Novel names were presented where required for anatomical clarity and harmonization. Strong consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement and weak consensus as 50% to 74% agreement. Results Sixty expert Collaborators participated in this study. After three rounds and clarification, harmonization, and introduction of novel nomenclature, strong consensus was achieved for the names of 16 block names and weak consensus for four names. For anatomical descriptions, strong consensus was achieved for 19 blocks and weak consensus was achieved for one approach. Several areas requiring further research were identified. Conclusions Harmonization and standardization of nomenclature may improve education, research, and ultimately patient care. We present the first international consensus on nomenclature and anatomical descriptions of blocks of the abdominal wall, chest wall, and paraspinal blocks. We recommend using the consensus results in academic and clinical practice.

Venous thromboembolism is recognized as a leading cause of maternal death in the United States. Thromboprophylaxis has been highlighted as a key preventive measure to reduce venous thromboembolism–related maternal deaths. However, the expanded use of thromboprophylaxis in obstetrics will have a major impact on the use and timing of neuraxial analgesia and anesthesia for women undergoing vaginal or cesarean delivery and other obstetric surgeries. Experts from the Society of Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology, the American Society of Regional Anesthesia, and hematology have collaborated to develop this comprehensive, pregnancy-specific consensus statement on neuraxial procedures in obstetric patients receiving thromboprophylaxis or higher dose anticoagulants. To date, none of the existing anesthesia societies’ recommendations have weighed the potential risks of neuraxial procedures in the presence of thromboprophylaxis, with the competing risks of general anesthesia with a potentially difficult airway, or maternal or fetal harm from avoidance or delayed neuraxial anesthesia. Furthermore, existing guidelines have not integrated the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of anticoagulants in the obstetric population. The goal of this consensus statement is to provide a practical guide of how to appropriately identify, prepare, and manage pregnant women receiving thromboprophylaxis or higher dose anticoagulants during the ante-, intra-, and postpartum periods. The tactics to facilitate multidisciplinary communication, evidence-based pharmacokinetic and spinal epidural hematoma data, and Decision Aids should help inform risk–benefit discussions with patients and facilitate shared decision making.