Skip to main content

Medicolegal implications

  • Chapter
Regional Analgesia in Obstetrics

Abstract

Doctors in general, and anaesthetists in particular, are privileged individuals. Every day of our working lives, people we have never met before place themselves unconditionally into our hands and allow us to carry out procedures that, if they go wrong, can result in severe disability or even death. In doing this, they are demonstrating considerable faith in our expertise, professionalism and beneficence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Robinson PN, Salmon P, Yentis SM. Maternal satisfaction. International Journal of Obstetric Anesthesia 1998; 7: 32–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 2 ALL ER 118

    Google Scholar 

  3. Maynard v. West Midlands Regional Health Authority [1985] 1 ALL ER 635

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bolitho v. City and Hackney Health Authority [1993] 4 Med. LR 117 (CA)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Barnett v. Chelsea and Kensington Hospital Management Committee [1969] 1 QB 428

    Google Scholar 

  6. The Right Honourable the Lord Woolf. Access to Justice. Final Report to the Lord Chancellor on the civil justice system in England and Wales. HMSO 1996

    Google Scholar 

  7. Russell IF. Levels of anaesthesia and intraoperative pain at caesarean section under regional block. International Journal of Obstetric Anesthesia 1995; 4: 71–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Covino BG, Scott DB. Handbook of epidural anaesthesia and analgesia. London: Grune and Stratton, 1985

    Google Scholar 

  9. May AE. Epidurals for childbirth. Oxford University Press, 1994

    Google Scholar 

  10. Carrie LES. Spinal and/or epidural blockade for caesarean section. In: Reynolds F. Epidural and spinal blockade in obstetrics. Balliere Tindall, 1990

    Google Scholar 

  11. Boume TM, de Melo AE, Bastianpillai BA, May AE. A survey of how British obstetric anaesthetists test regional anaesthesia before caesarean section. Anaesthesia 1997; 52: 901–3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bush DJ. A comparison of informed consent for obstetric anaesthesia in the USA and the UK. International Journal of Obstetric Anesthesia 1995; 4: 1–6

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bogod, D. (2000). Medicolegal implications. In: Reynolds, F. (eds) Regional Analgesia in Obstetrics. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0435-3_30

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0435-3_30

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-1142-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-0435-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics