Abstract

Background: Supine hypotensive syndrome is a pathophysiologic state in a parturient after 20 weeks’ gestation when put in the supine position during cesarian section under spinal anesthesia. Spinal anesthesia produces rapid, effective, reliable and safe anesthesia making it the preferred technique for cesarian section. Maternal hypotension is a known common side effect of spinal anesthesia and is generally managed pharmacologically and/or non Pharmacologically. The aim of this study was to assess the management of supine hypotension during cesarean section under spinal anesthesia among CRAs at Tamale Teaching Hospital (TTH). Methods: A cross-sectional study with both quantitative and descriptive approaches were employed. Thirty-eight (38) CRAs were conveniently sampled and a structured self-administered questionnaire was used for data collection after pretesting for validity and reliability. Data was analyzed with Stata I/C. Results: Non-Pharmacological interventions: 19(50%) of CRAs placed parturient in the supine position n after spinal anesthesia with head up, 15 (39.5%) in Supine position alone, 4 (10.5%), used lateral position alone. Pharmacological interventions (Use of Intravenous fluids): Lactated Ringers solution 6(15.8%), Normal saline solution 24(63.2%), Crystalloid and colloid combination 8(21%). Vasopressor of choice: Ephephrine alone 36(94.8%), Phenylephrine alone 1 (2.6%), Multiple agents 1 (2.6%). Preferred intervention: non-Pharmacological 21(55.3%), Pharmacological 17(44.7%). Determinants of choice of intervention: Severity of hypotension 29(76.3%), availability of intervention 7(18.5%), diagnosis of the patient 1(2.6%), frequency of hypotension 1(2.6%). Conclusions: Most CRAs placed parturient in the supine position with head up as a non-pharmacological approach to managing supine hypotension after spinal anesthesia. Normal saline solution and ephedrine were widely used as pharmacological agents. Majority of the CRAs preferred using the non-pharmacological techniques as compared with the pharmacological approaches and their choice of intervention was significantly influenced by the severity of the intervention.

References

1. Deborah J. Wilson et al. Spinal anesthesia for cesarian section. J Soc. Obstet Gynaecol Can 2008; 20(8): 754 – 761
2. Stones, PA et al. Complications of spinal anesthesia following extradural block for cesarian section. Br J Anaesth 2009; 6(2): 335 – 337
3. De-Giorgio et al. Supine hypotensive syndrome as the probable cause of both maternal and fetal death: A case of fatal supine hypotensive syndrome. Journal of forensic Sciences 2012; 57(6): 1646-1649
4. Krywko et al. Aortocaval compression syndrome. In StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing 2021.
5. Humphries et al. Hemodynamic Changes in women with symptoms of supine hypotensive syndrome. Acta Obsterica e Gynecologica Scandinavica 2020; 99(5): 631-636
6. Riley et al. Left Uterine tilt for cesarian delivery significantly improves Maternal Hemodynamics and should not be considered outdated Dogma. Anesthesiology 2018; 128(4): 858-859
7. Kinsella et al. Supine hypotensive Syndrome. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists 1994; 83(5): 774-788
8. Klohr et al. Definitions of hypotension after spinal anesthesia for cesarian section: Literature search and application to parturient. Acta Anesthesiologica Scandinavica 2010; 54(8):909-921
9. Kinsella et al. international consensus statement on the management of hypotension with vasopressors during cesarian section under spinal anesthesia. Anesthesia 2018; 73(1): 71-92
10. Malick et al. Practice Guidelines for obstetric Anesthesia: An updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Obstetric Anesthesia and the Society of Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology.
11. Chungsamarnyart et al. Hemodynamic profiles with and without left uterine displacement: A randomized study in term pregnancies receiving subarachnoid blockade for cesarian delivery. Journal of clinical anesthesia 2020; 64(10): 96-103
12. Hasanin et al. Hemodynamic effects of lateral tilt before and after spinal anesthesia during cesarian delivery: An observational Study. BMC Anesthesiology 2018; 18(1): 8-10
13. Kundra et al. Manual displacement of the uterus during cesarian section: Manual displacement of the uterus during LSCS 2007; 62(5): 460-465
14. Morgan et al. The effects of an increase of central blood volume before spinal anesthesia for cesarian delivery: A qualitative systematic review. Anesthesia and analgesia 2001; 92(4): 997-1005
15. Pickett et al. Decision making in Medicine. Elsevier 2010; Third. pp. 78-89
16. Ankcorn et al. Spinal Anesthesia: A Practical Guide 2000.
17. Kim et al. Effect of position changes after spinal anesthesia with low dose bupivacaine in elderly patients: Sensory block characteristics and hemodynamic changes. Korean Journal of Anesthesiology 2013; 64(3): 234-239
18. Chooi et al. Techniques for preventing hypotension during spinal anesthesia for cesarian section. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2017.
19. Burns et al. Prevention and Management of hypotension during spinal anesthesia for elective cesarian section: A Survey of Practice. Association of Anesthetists 2001; 56(8): 777-798
20. Webster et al. Obstetric anesthetists Association Survey 109. Phenylephrine in obstetric anesthesia- a survey of UK practice 2013.
21. Allen et al. A survey of the management of spinal induced hypotension for scheduled cesarian delivery. International Journal of Obstetric anesthesia 2009; 18(4): 356-361
22. Crawford et al. Time and lateral tilt at cesarian section. British Journal of Anesthesia 1972; 44(5): 477-484
23. Paech et al. Should we take a different angle in managing pregnant women at delivery? Attempting to avoid the supine hypotensive syndrome. Anesthesia and intensive Care 2008; 36(6): 775-777
24. Hartman et al. The incidence and risk factors for hypotension after spinal anesthesia induction: An analysis with automated data collection. Anesthesia and Analgesia 2002; 94(6): 1521-1529.
25. Sklebar et al. Spinal anesthesia induced hypotension in obstetrics: Prevention and therapy. Acta Clinica Croata 2019; 58(1): 90-95