Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Receipt of General Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery

Caroline Leigh Thomas*, Elizabeth M.S. Lange, Jennifer M. Banayan, Yinhua Zhu, Chuanhong Liao, Feyce M. Peralta, William A. Grobman, Barbara M. Scavone, Paloma Toledo

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

IMPORTANCE General anesthesia for cesarean delivery is associated with increased maternal morbidity, and Black and Hispanic pregnant patients have higher rates of general anesthesia use compared with their non-Hispanic White counterparts. It is unknown whether risk factors and indications for general anesthesia differ among patients of differing race and ethnicity. OBJECTIVE To evaluate differences in general anesthesia use for cesarean delivery and the indication for the general anesthetic by race and ethnicity. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In this retrospective, cross-sectional, single-center study, electronic medical records for all 35 117 patients who underwent cesarean delivery at Northwestern Medicine’s Prentice Women’s Hospital from January 1, 2007, to March 2, 2018, were queried for maternal demographics, clinical characteristics, obstetric and anesthetic data, the indication for cesarean delivery, and the indication for general anesthesia when used. Data analysis occurred in August 2023. EXPOSURE Cesarean delivery. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The rate of general anesthesia for cesarean delivery by race and ethnicity. RESULTS Of the 35 117 patients (median age, 33 years [IQR, 30-36 years]) who underwent cesarean delivery, 1147 (3.3%) received general anesthesia; the rates of general anesthesia were 2.5% for Asian patients (61 of 2422), 5.0% for Black patients (194 of 3895), 3.7% for Hispanic patients (197 of 5305), 2.8% for non-Hispanic White patients (542 of 19 479), and 3.8% (153 of 4016) for all other groups (including those who declined to provide race and ethnicity information) (P < .001). A total of 19 933 pregnant patients (56.8%) were in labor at the time of their cesarean delivery. Of those, 16 363 (82.1%) had neuraxial labor analgesia in situ. Among those who had an epidural catheter in situ, there were no racial or ethnic differences in the rates of general anesthesia use vs neuraxial analgesia use (Asian patients, 34 of 503 [6.8%] vs 1289 of 15 860 [8.1%]; Black patients, 78 of 503 [15.5%] vs 1925 of 15 860 [12.1%]; Hispanic patients, 80 of 503 [15.9%] vs 2415 of 15 860 [15.2%]; non-Hispanic White patients, 255 of 503 [50.7%] vs 8285 of 15 860 [52.2%]; and patients of other race or ethnicity, 56 of 503 [11.1%] vs 1946 of 15 860 [12.3%]; P = .16). Indications for cesarean delivery and for general anesthesia were not different when stratified by race and ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Racial disparities in rates of general anesthesia continue to exist; however, this study suggests that, for laboring patients who had labor epidural catheters in situ, no disparity by race or ethnicity existed. Future studies should address whether disparities in care that occur prior to neuraxial catheter placement are associated with higher rates of general anesthesia among patients from ethnic and racial minority groups.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere202350825
JournalJAMA network open
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2024

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Receipt of General Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this