• C M Gleeson and F Reynolds.
• Anaesthetic Department, St Thomas' Hospital, Lambeth Palace Road, London, UK.
• Int J Obstet Anesth. 1998 Oct 1; 7 (4): 242-6.

AbstractHeadache following epidural analgesia is a common cause of complaint, but accidental dural puncture rates vary among hospitals and with techniques. We were therefore interested to discover the extent of audit of dural puncture, the dural puncture rates in those UK centres that kept reliable records, and the techniques they used for detecting the epidural space. Consultants in charge of anaesthetic services to all 257 obstetric units in the UK were sent a questionnaire requesting numbers of obstetric epidurals, techniques used to detect the epidural space and the numbers of accidental dural punctures in the years 1991-1995. Replies were received from 191 respondents (74%) of whom 104 were able to provide some information about dural puncture rates. Dural puncture rate was inversely related to the number of epidurals performed; the highest recorded rate was 3.6% in a unit with < 300 epidurals annually, and the lowest 0.19% in a unit with > 1000. Most respondents did not record the loss of resistance technique used but among those who did, the dural puncture rate using mainly saline was 0.69% and using mainly air was 1.11% (P<0.001). Since accurate patient information is crucial for informed consent, audit needs to be improved in many centres. Though the accidental dural puncture rate may be under-reported in this survey, our data are in agreement with other findings that loss of resistance to saline is safer than loss of resistance to air.

11 keywords...

hide…