Keywords
history
obstetric analgesia.
Abstract
Objectives: To compare current obstetric analgesia concepts and methods with those existing 100 years ago, when Anesthesia & Analgesia (1922) and British Journal of Anaesthesia (1923), the first two independently published anesthesia journals, were first published. Methods: We identified and analyzed all articles related to obstetric analgesia published in these journals during the years 1922 and 1923 and compared them with current clinical practice. We also searched these issues for indirect references to the attention given to obstetric analgesia at scientific meetings of the time. Results: In the first issue of Anesthesia & Analgesia, appearing in August 1922, 3 of the 8 articles published are related exclusively to obstetric anesthesia and analgesia, and between 1922 and 1923 we found a high number of articles and references. The analysis of these articles published a century ago allows us to objectify the interest of the time in the results, the comparison between different anesthetic methods, safety and the dissemination of scientific knowledge. References to mortality, complications, patient comfort and satisfaction, the influence of obstetric analgesia on the duration of labor, as well as savings in time and anesthetic gases are common. It is obvious that today's research methodology cannot be compared with that of 100 years ago. But there are many scientific aspects that laid some of the foundations of current research in obstetrics, including the collection of large series of patients over long periods of time, the express mention of the publication of both favorable and unfavorable results, the references not only to cost but also to cost-effectiveness, as well as the use of specific parameters to measure not only results but also patient satisfaction. Conclusions: It is evident that over the years the outcomes in the practice of anesthesiology have improved, but also that many concepts remain the same 100 years later. The high number of articles published between 1922 and 1923 reflects the interest that existed a century ago in obstetric analgesia, and leads us to think that it may have been an important line of research in the specialty at that time.References
1. Lim G. What Is New in Obstetric Anesthesia: The 2021 Gerard W. Ostheimer Lecture. Anesth Analg. 2023;136(2):387-96.
2. Bishop DG, Fernandes NL, Dyer RA, Sumikura H, Okada H, Suga Y, et al. Global issues in obstetric anaesthesia: perspectives from South Africa, Japan, China, Latin America and North America. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2023;54:103648.
3. Kurdi MS, Rajagopal V, Sangineni KS, Thalaiappan M, Grewal A, Gupta S. Recent advances in obstetric anaesthesia and critical care. Indian J Anaesth. 2023;67(1):19-26.
4. Toledano RD, Leffert L. What's New in Neuraxial Labor Analgesia. Curr Anesthesiol Rep. 2021;11(3):340-7.
5. Practice Guidelines for Obstetric Anesthesia: An Updated Report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Obstetric Anesthesia and the Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology. Anesthesiology. 2016;124(2):270-300.
6. Manrique S, Guasch E. Actualización de los protocolos asistenciales de la Sección de Anestesia Obstétrica de la SEDAR. 2ª Edición. Madrid: SEDAR;2016.
7. Pagés F. Metameric anesthesia. Rev San Mil. 1921;3:351-65.
8. Guedel AE. Third stage ether anesthesia; a sub-classification regarding the significance of the position and movements of the eyeball. Am J Surg [Anesth Suppl]. 1920;34:53-7.
9. Bourne W, Duncan JW. Morbidity and mortality in obstetrics as influenced by anesthesia. Curr Research Anesth Analg. 1922;1(1):27-33.
10. Rives AE. Continuous nitrous oxid-oxygen analgesia and anesthesia with rebreathing in obstetrics, Technic of administration and summary of results. Curr Research Anesth Analg. 1922;1(1):3-7.
11. Hewitt WF. Nitrous oxid-oxygen analgesia in combination with local anesthesia in caesarean section operations. Curr Research Anesth Analg. 1922;1(1):8-9.
12. Davis C, Henry M D. Anesthesia and analgesia for dystocia. Curr Research Anesth Analg. 1923;2(1):3-9.
13. Maple JB. Obstetrical fables in gas with reports of 100 cases. Curr Research Anesth Analg. 1923;2(4):123-8.
14. Miller AH. Obstetric shock. Curr Research Anesth Analg. 1924;3(1):23-6.
15. Lane EH. Some observations on continuous nitrous oxid-oxygen analgesia in obstetrics. Curr Research Anesth Analg. 1924;3(2):76-8.
16. Donovan EP, Gwathmey JT. Painless childbirth by synergistic methods. a preliminary report. Br J Anaesth. 1923;1(1):8-21.
17. Cooke HT. Spinal Anaesthesia in obstetrics and caesarean section. Society Reports. American and Pacific Coast Anaesthetists. Br J Anaesth. 1923;1(1):52-3.
18. House RE. Medico-legal and obstetrical considerations of scopolamine anaesthesia. Society Reports. American and Pacific Coast Anaesthetists. Br J Anaesth. 1923;1(1):52-3.
19. Blomfield J. Sacral or epidural analgesia. Br J Anaesth. 1923:1(1):22-6.
20. Simpson JY. Notes on the employment of the inhalation of sulphuric ether in the practice of midwifery. In: Monthly Journal of Medical Science (March). Edinburgh: Sutherland and Knox; 1847.
21. Simpson JY. New anæsthetic agent, more efficient than sulphuric ether. In: Monthly Journal of Medical Science (November). Edinburgh: Sutherland and Knox; 1847.
22. Saklad M. Grading of patients for surgical procedures. Anesthesiology. 1941;2:281-4.
23. Dogliotti AM. Segmental peridural spinal anesthesia. Am J Surg. 1933;20:107-18.
24. Labat G. Regional Anesthesia. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1923. p. 436-55.
25. Maltby JR, Hutter CDD, Clayton KC. The Woolley and Roe case. Br J Anaesth. 2000;84(1):121-6.