Year : 2021  |  Volume : 15  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 383-386

The trends of obstetric anesthesia practice: In a tertiary care center in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

1 King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences; King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
2 King Abdullah International Medical Research Center; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
3 King Abdullah International Medical Research Center; Department of Anesthesia, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
4 King Abdullah International Medical Research Center; Department of Pediatric Anesthesia, King Abdullah Specialized Children Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Correspondence Address:
Mohammed Alshabibi
Medical Intern at King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh
Saudi Arabia
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/sja.sja_83_21

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: Obstetric anesthesia provides several methods for the analgesia of labor pain. The neuraxial technique is considered the standard of care for parturient women. The epidural block is widely used in vaginal delivery while the spinal block is the preferred method for cesarean section (C-section). We aim to know the practice of obstetric anesthesia in our center. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary center in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The data of all delivery cases from 1/7/2019 to 30/9/2019 were reviewed. Results: We identified a total of 2,140 cases during the 3 months, vaginal delivery was the most common with 72.4% (1550) while the C-section cases were 27.6% (590). Regarding the type of analgesia/anesthesia for vaginal deliveries, intramuscular analgesia was the commonest group with 34.8% (540), followed by the group of ladies who did not receive any analgesia/anesthesia with 31.9% (495), thirdly was epidural cases with 31.8% (493), and the fourth type was spinal 0.6% (10). Regarding C-section, the emergency cases were 65.4% (386). The types of anesthesia for all C-sections were as follows spinal 63.5% (375), GA 23.8% (141), and epidural 12% (74). Regarding anesthesia for elective cases, spinal was 85% (174), GA 14% (28), and epidural 1% (2). Regarding anesthesia for emergency cases, spinal was 52% (201), GA 29% (113), and epidural 19% (72). Conclusions: The use of epidural was low, and the spinal use was relatively on par if we compare with leading western countries. More focused studies and multicenter studies are needed in the country.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded144    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal