LAUSR

OBJECTIVE Obstetric anaesthesia aims to deliver a healthy baby as well as render a comfortable operation for the mother. This study compared general and spinal anaesthesia in terms of the quality of recovery and patient satisfaction in women undergoing emergency caesarean deliveries. METHODS In total, 100 patients were enrolled in this prospective, single-blind, cross-sectional clinical study. Patients were divided into spinal (n=50) and general (n=50) anaesthesia groups. The recovery score, pain and satisfaction were evaluated by Quality of Recovery Score (QoR-40), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at 24 hours postoperatively. RESULTS The total QoR-40 scores were significantly higher and the total operation time was longer in the spinal anaesthesia group (median score: 194.5 vs. 179.0, p<0.001 and mean±SD: 69.0±13.3 vs. 62.7±13.4 minutes, p=0.02, respectively). There was no significant difference in VAS and NRS scores between the groups. CONCLUSION Both spinal anaesthesia and general anaesthesia have advantages and disadvantages in terms of emergency caesarean deliveries. Spinal anaesthesia speeds up the recovery time and enables the mother to return to normal life earlier, while general anaesthesia has a short initiation time and does not affect patient satisfaction.