Influence of training in the use and generation of evidence on episiotomy practice and perineal trauma

Objective

To examine episiotomy practices before and after a multi-component intervention designed to support the use and generation of research evidence in maternal and neonatal health care.

Methods

Set in 9 centers across 4 Southeast Asian countries, a retrospective survey was performed for 12 recommended pregnancy/childbirth practices and 13 outcomes of women in each center before and after intervention. Qualitative interviews were conducted to assess staff awareness and experience in evidence-based practice.

Results

There were significant decreases in the rate of episiotomy, from 64.1% to 60.1% (risk difference [RD] -4.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], -5.8 to -2.2) for all women and from 92.2% to 80.7% (RD -11.5; 95% CI, -13.4 to -9.6) for nulliparous women. Severe trauma decreased from 3.9% to 1.9% (RD -2.0; 95% CI, -2.7 to -1.4) for all women and from 6.7% to 3.0% (RD -3.7; 95% CI, -4.9 to -2.5) for nulliparous women. The frequency of intact perineum increased from 12.4% to 15.6% (RD 3.2; 95% CI, 1.9-4.6) for all women and from 1.7% to 8.0% (RD 6.3; 95% CI, 5.0-7.5) for nulliparous women.

Conclusion

An intervention based on understanding and using the best available evidence can result in significant improvements in care and health outcomes.     

Clinician-specific episiotomy rates: impact on perineal outcomes

Recent, large, randomized, controlled trials of the effects of episiotomy on perineal damage have confirmed that episiotomy is associated with an increased risk of damage to the perineum. Yet episiotomy remains the most common surgical procedure women undergo. This article examines if clinician experience, rather than scientific evidence, forms the basis for continuing this practice. Perineal outcome data are analyzed for 865 low-risk women who were attended at birth by the staff nurse-midwives or faculty obstetricians at a university-based, tertiary-care hospital. Data were collected under routine, nonexperimental conditions such that the circumstances of the labor and the clinician's preferences were allowed to determine management decisions regarding the use of episiotomy or other techniques of perineal management. Multivariate findings indicate that in the absence of episiotomy, rates of perineal integrity were highest among clinicians who usually had the lowest rate of episiotomy use. When an episiotomy was done, rates of third- and fourth-degree extensions were highest among clinicians who used episiotomy most frequently. This finding challenges the idea that clinicians who were very experienced with the use of episiotomy would avoid complications such as extensions. Future research should explore the use of nonsurgical techniques such as those employed by midwives to promote perineal integrity. Then interdisciplinary research and evidence-based education regarding these techniques can occur to improve perineal outcomes for all women.     

Factors predicting severe perineal trauma during childbirth: role of forceps delivery routinely combined with mediolateral episiotomy

OBJECTIVE: Anal sphincter injury and its sequelae are a recognized complication of vaginal childbirth. The aim of the present study was to identify risk factors for third- and fourth-degree perineal tears in patients undergoing either spontaneous or vaginal-assisted delivery by forceps routinely combined with mediolateral episiotomy. STUDY DESIGN: We retrospectively reviewed 5377 vaginal deliveries based on the analysis of the obstetric database and patient records of our department during a 5-year period from 1999 to 2003. Cases and control subjects were chosen randomly and patients' records were reviewed for the following variables: maternal age, parity, gestational age, tobacco use, gestational diabetes or pregnancy-induced hypertension, use of peridural anesthesia, duration of first and second stages of labor, use of mediolateral episiotomy, forceps combined with mediolateral episiotomy, induction of labor, infant head diameter, shoulder circumference, and birth weight. RESULTS: Of 5044 spontaneous vaginal deliveries 32 (0.6%) and of 333 assisted vaginal deliveries 14 (4.2%) patients sustained a perineal defect involving the external sphincter. An univariate analysis of these 46 cases and 155 randomly selected control subjects showed that low parity (P = .003; Mann-Whitney U test), prolonged first and second stages of labor (P = .001, P = .001), high birth weight (P = .031), episiotomy (P = .004; Fisher exact test), and forceps delivery (P = .002) increased the risk for sphincter damage. In multivariate regression models, only high birth weight (P = .004; odds ratio [OR] 1.68, 1.18-2.41, 95% confidence interval [CI]), and forceps delivery combined with mediolateral episiotomies (P < .001; OR 5.62, 2.16-14.62, 95% CI) proved to be independent risk factors. There was a statistical significant interaction of birth weight and head circumference (P = .012; OR 0.99, 0.98-0.99, 95% CI). Although the use of episiotomy conferred an increased risk toward a higher likelihood of severe perineal trauma, it did not reach statistical significance (P = .06; OR 2.15, 0.97-4.76, 95% CI). CONCLUSIONS: In consistence with previous reports, women who are vaginally delivered of a large infant are at a high risk for sphincter damage. Although the rate of these complications was surprisingly low in vaginally assisted childbirth, the use of forceps, even if routinely combined with mediolateral episiotomy, should be minimized whenever possible.     

The outcomes of midline versus medio-lateral episiotomy

Background  

Episiotomy is the surgical enlargement of the vaginal orifice by an incision of the perineum during the second stage of labor or just before delivery of the baby. During the 1970s, it was common to perform an episiotomy for almost all women having their first delivery, ostensibly for prevention of severe perineum tears and easier subsequent repair. However, there are no data available to indicate if an episiotomy should be midline or medio-lateral. We compared midline versus medio-lateral episiotomy for complication such as extended perineal tears, pain scores, wound infection rates and other complications.     

The effect of epidural analgesia on rates of episiotomy use and episiotomy extension in an inner-city hospital

Objective : To determine the relationship between epidural analgesia and episiotomy usage and episiotomy extension in parturients delivering vaginally. Methods : A database of 20 888 women experiencing spontaneous vaginal delivery at Grady Memorial Hospital from 1990 to 1995 was examined to identify those receiving epidural analgesia. Patients who underwent epidural catheter placement and had adequate perineal anesthesia at delivery comprised the epidural group, and all others comprised the control group. Demographic characteristics and obstetric outcomes were compared. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to test the association between epidural analgesia, rates of episiotomy and episiotomy extension. Results : Of the 20 888 women experiencing spontaneous vaginal deliveries 6785 (32.5%) received epidural analgesia. Women receiving epidural analgesia were more likely than those not receiving epidural analgesia to be African-American and nulliparous, and to have an occiput posterior presentation. Women receiving epidural analgesia were also more likely to receive an episiotomy (27.8% vs. 13.1%, odds ratio (OR) 2.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.38-2.75) and were less likely to experience a second-degree perineal laceration (11.6% vs. 14.4%, OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.69-0.82) or a third- or fourth-degree extension (8.9% vs. 12.4%, OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68-0.97). When the results were adjusted for nulliparity, posterior presentation, macrosomia, shoulder dystocia and prolonged second stage, epidural analgesia remained independently associated with receipt of episiotomy (OR 1.97, 95% CI 1.88-2.06) and reduced episiotomy extension (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.54-0.94). Conclusion : Epidural analgesia increases the rates of episiotomy use, and decreases the rate of episiotomy extension, independently of clinical factors associated with episiotomy.     

The effect of epidural analgesia on rates of episiotomy use and episiotomy extension in an inner-city hospital

OBJECTIVE: To determine the relationship between epidural analgesia and episiotomy usage and episiotomy extension in parturients delivering vaginally. METHODS: A database of 20 888 women experiencing spontaneous vaginal delivery at Grady Memorial Hospital from 1990 to 1995 was examined to identify those receiving epidural analgesia. Patients who underwent epidural catheter placement and had adequate perineal anesthesia at delivery comprised the epidural group, and all others comprised the control group. Demographic characteristics and obstetric outcomes were compared. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to test the association between epidural analgesia, rates of episiotomy and episiotomy extension. RESULTS: Of the 20888 women experiencing spontaneous vaginal deliveries 6785 (32.5%) received epidural analgesia. Women receiving epidural analgesia were more likely than those not receiving epidural analgesia to be African-American and nulliparous, and to have an occiput posterior presentation. Women receiving epidural analgesia were also more likely to receive an episiotomy (27.8% vs. 13.1%, odds ratio (OR) 2.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.38-2.75) and were less likely to experience a second-degree perineal laceration (11.6% vs. 14.4%, OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.69-0.82) or a third- or fourth-degree extension (8.9% vs. 12.4%, OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68-0.97). When the results were adjusted for nulliparity, posterior presentation, macrosomia, shoulder dystocia and prolonged second stage, epidural analgesia remained independently associated with receipt of episiotomy (OR 1.97, 95% CI 1.88-2.06) and reduced episiotomy extension (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.54-0.94). CONCLUSION: Epidural analgesia increases the rates of episiotomy use, and decreases the rate of episiotomy extension, independently of clinical factors associated with episiotomy.     

Restricted use of episiotomy

Objective

To compare the outcome of restricted versus routine use of episiotomy in a tertiary care center.

Method

A prospective observational study was conducted for singleton normal vaginal term deliveries. Deliveries managed with routine use of episiotomy formed the ‘Control Group’, while those managed with restricted use of episiotomy formed the ‘Study Group’. Data so obtained was analyzed.

Results

Total number of deliveries analyzed was 458 (‘Control Group’: n=210, ‘Study Group’: n=248). Restricted use of episiotomy led to 64% (n=159) women delivering without any perineal laceration, in ‘Study Group’. This translated into 41% (n=38) reduction in the number of perineal lacerations in primipara, and 23% (n=36) in multipara, compared to the ‘Control Group’. Only 2% of primipara in ‘Study Group’ had severe third degree perineal tears.

Conclusion

Restricted use of episiotomy resulted in considerable reduction in maternal morbidity due to perineal lacerations.     

Giant perineal leiomyoma incidentally manifested at a recent episiotomy site: case report

Benign leiomyomas are common soft tumors, arising especially in the female genital tract; unlike uterine leiomyomas, they rarely occur in perineal regions. They can develop wherever smooth muscle is present. Herein is reported the case of a large perineal leiomyoma in a 36-year-old woman who noted a palpable mass close to the rectum 1 year after she had delivered vaginally, in the same region of as a mediolateral episiotomy. Complete surgical excision was performed. Histopathologic findings were compatible with benign leiomyoma. At postoperative follow-up, no signs of anal dysfunction were noted. There was no pathologic correlation between formation of the leiomyoma and the episiotomy despite a possible association between the presence of fibrosis and development of leiomyomas, which was found during a literature review. Microarray analysis will be necessary to elucidate this hypothesis.     

The anatomy of the perineal membrane: its relationship to injury in childbirth and episiotomy

BACKGROUND: Episiotomy during childbirth, intended to protect the anal sphincter, may fail to do so. Furthermore damage to the anal sphincter complex may occur without complete perineal tear. We hypothesise that these particular injuries may occur due to posterior displacement of the anus leading to distraction of the anal sphincter complex from an anterior attachment to the perineal membrane. However, the anatomical basis for this has not been well defined. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between the anal sphincter and the perineal membrane. MATERIALS AND METHODS: High-resolution MRI scans of a female cadaver perineum were performed. The imaging findings were correlated with the anatomical structure identified on dissection and histological examination. RESULTS: The perineal membrane was easily identified on MR imaging. Fibres from the perineal membrane could be seen to attach to the anal sphincter complex at the apex of the perineal body This was confirmed on histological examination and was a deeper layer than that of the decussation of the superficial transverse perineal muscle with the superficial part of the external anal sphincter. CONCLUSION: The upper ano-rectal canal and apex of the perineal body have demonstrable attachment to the free margin of the perineal membrane postero-lateral to the lower vagina. This attachment would resist posterior displacement of the anal canal.     

Third degree obstetric perineal tears: risk factors and the preventive role of mediolateral episiotomy

Objective To determine risk factors for third degree obstetric perineal tears and to give recommendations for prevention.
Design Retrospective case–control study.
Setting A teaching hospital in The Netherlands.
Participants and methods One hundred and twenty cases of vaginal delivery complicated by third degree perineal tear and 702 uncomplicated vaginal deliveries were compared, with respect to possible risk factors.
Results In a multivariate model high birthweight, forceps delivery, induced labour, epidural anaesthesia and parity were risk factors for anal sphincter tear. In addition, mediolateral episiotomy was associated with fewer sphincter injuries. Separate analysis of nulli- and multiparous women demonstrated that high birthweight and epidural anaesthesia (increased risk) and mediolateral episiotomy (decreased risk) were factors associated with anal sphincter tear only in nulliparous women.
Conclusions We found several risk factors for anal sphincter tear. Nulliparous women are at higher risk than multiparous women. Mediolateral episiotomy may be sphincter-saving especially in nulliparous women and therefore prevent them from chronic faecal incontinence.     

A randomised clinical trial of the effect of low-level laser therapy for perineal pain and healing after episiotomy: A pilot study

Objective

to evaluate the effects of low-level laser therapy for perineal pain and healing after episiotomy.

Design

a double-blind, randomised, controlled clinical trial comparing perineal pain scores and episiotomy healing in women treated with low-level laser therapy (LLLT) and with the simulation of the treatment.

Setting

the study was conducted in the Birth Centre and rooming-in units of Amparo Maternal, a maternity service located in the city of São Paulo, Brazil.

Participants

fifty-two postpartum women who had had mediolateral episiotomies during their first normal delivery were randomly divided into two groups of 26: an experimental group and a control group.

Intervention

in the experimental group, the women were treated with LLLT. Irradiation was applied at three points directly on the episiotomy after the suture and in three postpartum sessions: up to 2 hrs postpartum, between 20 and 24 hrs postpartum and between 40 and 48 hrs postpartum. The LLLT was performed with diode laser, with a wavelength of 660 nm (red light), spot size of 0.04 cm², energy density of 3.8 J/cm², radiant power of 15 mW and 10 s per point, which resulted in an energy of 0.15 J per point and a total energy of 0.45 J per session. The control group participants also underwent three treatment sessions, but without the emission of radiation (simulation group), to assess the possible effects of placebo treatment.

Main outcomes

perineal pain scores, rated on a scale from 0 to 10, were evaluated before and immediately after the irradiation in the three sessions. The healing process was assessed using the REEDA scale (Redness, Edema, Echymosis, Discharge Aproximation) before each laser therapy session and 15 and 20 days after the women's discharge.

Findings

comparing the pain scores before and after the LLLT sessions, the experimental group presented a significant within-group reduction in mean pain scores after the second and third sessions (p=0.003 and p<0.001, respectively), and the control group showed a significant reduction after the first treatment simulation (p=0.043). However, the comparison of the perineal pain scores between the experimental and control groups indicated no statistical difference at any of the evaluated time points. There was no significant difference in perineal healing scores between the groups. All postpartum women approved of the low-level laser therapy.

Conclusions

this pilot study showed that LLLT did not accelerate episiotomy healing. Although there was a reduction in perineal pain mean scores in the experimental group, we cannot conclude that the laser relieved perineal pain. This study led to the suggestion of a new research proposal involving another irradiation protocol to evaluate LLLT's effect on perineal pain relief.     

Preventing perineal trauma during childbirth: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE: To review systematically techniques proposed to prevent perineal trauma during childbirth and meta-analyze the evidence of their efficacy from randomized controlled trials. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (1966-1999), the Cochrane Library (1999 Issue 1), and the Cochrane Collaboration: Pregnancy and Childbirth Database (1995); and reference lists from articles identified. Search terms included childbirth or pregnancy or delivery, and perineum, episiotomy, perineal massage, obstetric forceps, vacuum extraction, labor stage-second. No language or study-type constraints were imposed. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions affecting perineal trauma were reviewed. If no RCTs were available, nonrandomized research designs such as cohort studies were included. Studies were selected by examination of titles and abstracts of more than 1,500 articles, followed by analysis of the methods sections of studies that appeared to be RCTs. INTEGRATION AND RESULTS: Eligible studies used random or quasirandom allocation of an intervention of interest and reported perineal outcomes. Further exclusions were based on failure to report results by intention to treat, or incomplete or internally inconsistent reporting of perineal outcomes. Final selection of studies and data extraction was by consensus of the first two authors. Data from trials that evaluated similar interventions were combined using a random effects model to determine weighted estimate of risk difference and number needed to treat. Effects of sensitivity analysis and quality scoring were examined. Results indicated good evidence that avoiding episiotomy decreased perineal trauma (absolute risk difference -0.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.35, -0.11). In nulliparas, perineal massage during the weeks before giving birth also protected against perineal trauma (risk difference -0.08, CI -0.12, -0.04). Vacuum extraction (risk difference -0.06, CI -0.10, -0.02) and spontaneous birth (-0.11, 95% CI -0.18, -0.04) caused less anal sphincter trauma than forceps delivery. The mother's position during the second stage has little influence on perineal trauma (supported upright versus recumbent: risk difference 0.02, 95% CI -0.05, 0.09). CONCLUSION: Factors shown to increase perineal integrity include avoiding episiotomy, spontaneous or vacuum-assisted rather than forceps birth, and in nulliparas, perineal massage during the weeks before childbirth. Second-stage position has little effect. Further information on techniques to protect the perineum during spontaneous delivery is sorely needed.     

Management of the perineum during forceps delivery. Association of episiotomy with the frequency and severity of perineal trauma in women undergoing forceps delivery

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of the frequency and severity of perineal trauma with episiotomy performed at forceps delivery. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective study analyzed all forceps deliveries at the Semmelweis Women's Hospital Vienna between February 1999 and July 1999. Evaluation of a possible association of episiotomy with the frequency and severity of perineal trauma was the main objective of the study. Episiotomy was not performed routinely and was either midline or mediolateral. RESULTS: In conjunction with forceps delivery episiotomy, 76/87 women (87%) underwent forceps delivery episiotomy; among those, 49/76 (64%) had a mediolateral episiotomy and 27/76 (36%) a midline episiotomy. The frequency and severity of perineal tears were significantly lower in forceps deliveries when an episiotomy was performed. When analyzing the type of episiotomy, the data revealed a statistically significantly lower frequency of perineal trauma when mediolateral episiotomy was performed as compared to midline episiotomy. CONCLUSION: If obstetric indications necessitate forceps delivery, performance of an episiotomy decreases the risk of perineal tears of all degrees. When analyzing the type of episiotomy, mediolateral episiotomy seems to be more protective against perineal trauma in women undergoing forceps delivery.     

The prophylactic use of diclofenac (Voltarol) suppositories in perineal pain after episiotomy. A random allocation double-blind study.

One hundred and ten patients who had episiotomies to aid normal vaginal delivery without epidural analgesia were = allocated at random to receive either diclofenac (n = 56) or = placebo (n = 54) suppositories. Pain after episiotomy was assessed at 24 and 48 hours using a combination of a visual analogue scale, a modified pain score and a review of additional analgesia required. All patients in both groups were allowed routine hospital analgesia on request. Our data suggests that very few patients suffered severe pain, even in the placebo group. However, the prophylactic use of diclofenac suppositories significantly reduced perineal pain in the first 24 hours, although the difference was less marked by 48 hours. Overall additional analgesia requirement was correspondingly less in the diclofenac group.