[-Anesthesia and analgesia practice patterns in French obstetrical patients-].

Objective: To assess the rate of epidural analgesia (EA) for parturition and the techniques of anaesthesia for Caesarean section (CS).

Study Design: Retrospective study.

Patients: A series of 84,235 deliveries.

Methods: The series was extracted from a total of 770,054 deliveries carried out in 1991, according to the number of births in each hospital (1/1 if the births were < or = 100 per year, up to 1/25 if they were > or = 2,000 per year). The data analyzed included: anaesthesia technique, whether or not there was an anaesthetist on night duty at the hospital, birth rate in the hospital, type of hospital: university (UH), general (GH) or private (PH). For vaginal deliveries, the mode of labour commencement (spontaneous or induced), the multiplicity of pregnancies and a history of past CS were also noted.

Results: Vaginal deliveries: the overall rate of EA was 37.2%. EA were not carried out in 5% of maternity hospitals. In cases of spontaneous labour, the average rate was 32.1%, significantly less than for induced labour (59.6%, P < 0.0001) and in cases of previous CS (39%, P < 0.05). There was no statistical difference in cases of multiple pregnancies (35.7%). The average rate of EA was correlated to the number of annual births (P < 0.001) and was increased when the anaesthetist was present in hospital at night (P < 0.001). It was also significantly lower in GH (P < 0.001) than in UH or PH, which were equivalent. Scheduled CS: general anaesthesia (GA) was carried out at a significantly higher rate than regional anaesthesia (RA) (49.7% vs 48.4%, P < 0.05). In 15.1% of hospitals, RA was not available. The incidence of RA was influenced neither by the rate of annual births nor by the presence of the anaesthetist in the hospital during night. However, RA was significantly less frequent in GH (46.3%, P < 0.001) than in UH (48.6%) and in PH (53.6%) which were equivalent. CS during labour: the incidence of RA was significantly higher than GA (53.2% vs 44.1%, P < 0.001). In 17.1% of hospitals, RA was never carried out. The rate of RA was correlated to the size of the maternity hospital, and significantly higher (P < 0.001) when the anaesthetist was present in hospital during night. The differences between UH, GH and EP were the same than for scheduled CS.

Conclusion: In France in 1991, the average rate of 37.2% for EA for obstetrics was high when compared to the rate in United Kingdom. It was equivalent to those in United States and Ontario, Canada. The discrepancies between hospitals were mainly related to structural and organizational factors. The influence of the size of the maternity hospital, the 24-hour service of EA was also shown in other studies. However, the difference between GA and UH and PH is a French particularity. The high rate of GA for CS differs largely with those in the UK or the USA. The time saving aspect of GA was probably an important factor for the choice of this technique. This study must be reactualized and enlarged to determine the demand of EA for labour by parturients and obstetricians.