ArticleAnnals of Ibadan postgraduate medicine2025
AUDIT OF OBSTETRIC ANAESTHESIA SERVICES IN A NIGERIAN TERTIARY HOSPITAL.
Article in Annals of Ibadan postgraduate medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Obstetric anaesthesia is an important anaesthesia subspecialty. The challenges presented by parturients requiring anaesthesia, analgesia, or both make the role of the obstetric anaesthetist both challenging and rewarding. This audit was undertaken to review obstetric anaesthesia services at the University College Hospital, Ibadan, over 2 years and thus identify areas for improvement. Methods: This was a two-year retrospective, cross-sectional study of obstetric anaesthesia services at University College Hospital, Ibadan. Data were collected from the anaesthesia record and entered into an Excel spreadsheet. The collected data included age, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) class, type and urgency of surgery, anaesthetic technique, outcomes, and critical incidents. Data was analysed using the Python programming language within the Jupyter Notebook environment. Results: One thousand eight hundred and seventy anaesthetics were administered at the labour ward complex during this period, with 93.3% being for caesarean deliveries. The majority of patients were classified as ASA II. Previous caesarean delivery was the most common indication for surgery, accounting for approximately a quarter of the reasons. Of these procedures, 92.4% were performed under subarachnoid block (SAB), while 6.7% were conducted under general anaesthesia. Only four patients received labour epidural analgesia (LEA). The immediate post-operative outcome was satisfactory in nearly all cases. Hypotension was the most frequently reported intraoperative critical incident. Conclusion: Subarachnoid block remains the major anaesthetic technique in obstetric anaesthesia. However, minimal labour epidural analgesia is being provided.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41404093PMC12704348What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.