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.     

From research to practice: the example of antenatal care in Thailand

The rationale for providing antenatal care is to screen predominantly healthy pregnant women to detect early signs of, or risk factors for, abnormal conditions or diseases and to follow this detection with effective and timely intervention. The recommended antenatal care programme in most developing countries is often the same as the programmes used in developed countries. However, in developing countries there is wide variation in the proportion of women who receive antenatal care. The WHO randomized trial of antenatal care and the WHO systematic review indicated that a model of care that provided fewer antenatal visits could be introduced into clinical practice without causing adverse consequences to the woman or the fetus. This new model of antenatal care is being implemented in Thailand. Action has been required at all levels of the health-care system, from consumers through to health professionals, the Ministry of Public Health and international organizations. The Thai experience is a good example of moving research findings into practice, and it should be replicated elsewhere to effectively manage other health problems.     

A placebo-controlled,double-blind,randomized study of single-dose intravenous diclofenac for pain relief after a cesarean section

BackgroundThis study was conducted to avoid the pain of an intramuscular injection of diclofenac after a cesarean section, by modifying it to an intravenous infusion by diluting it with 5% dextrose in 100 mL of water.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of a single-dose modified diclofenac being given intravenously, instead of intramuscularly, for pain relief after a cesarean section.Study designA double-blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted.ParticipantsWe enrolled 30 patients who underwent cesarean sections with Pfannenstiel skin incision.MethodsAll patients received 2.2–2.5 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine with 0.2 mg morphine for spinal anesthesia. The participants were equally and randomly allocated to two groups to receive intravenous diclofenac or placebo at 12 hours postoperatively. Both groups received the same regimen for postoperative pain control.Main outcome measurementsThe severity of postoperative pain was measured directly using a verbal numerical rating scale (0–10) and a pain-relief scale (1–4), and indirectly from the amount of tramadol used.ResultsThe characteristics of the two groups of patients were similar. The mean postoperative pain relief at 24 hours in the study group was better than that in the control group (3.14 ± 0.66 vs. 2.13 ± 0.99; p < 0.05). The severity of postoperative pain at 24 hours and the amount of tramadol used were not different between groups.ConclusionIntramuscular diclofenac (75 mg), modified by diluting it with 5% dextrose in 100 mL of water, for intravenous administration in combination with spinal morphine (0.2 mg) provided good analgesia after a cesarean section within 24 hours when assessed by the pain-relief scale; however, the mean pain intensity was not different.     

Placebo-controlled,double-blind,randomized study of prophylactic antibiotics in elective abdominal hysterectomy

To assess the efficacy of a single dose of ampicillin or cefazolin in preventing fever and infection after elective abdominal hysterectomy, we conducted a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial at Srinagarind Hospital, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University and Khon Kaen Regional Hospital. Three hundred and thirty patients scheduled for elective abdominal hysterectomy were randomly allocated into either placebo, ampicillin or cefazolin groups. Patients received sterile water (3 mL) or ampicillin (1 g) or cefazolin (1 g) intravenously according to random assignment 30 min before the operation. After the operation, all patients were assessed by blinded independent evaluators until discharged from the hospitals. Our main outcome measures were postoperative fever and infectious morbidity. We found that 321 patients (97.3% of recruited patients) were available for data analysis, 108 in placebo, 106 in ampicillin and 107 in cefazolin group. Febrile morbidity occurred in 13/108 (12.0%), 14/106 (13.2%) and 12/107 (11.2%) of patients in the placebo, ampicillin and cefazolin groups, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in febrile morbidity between the three groups. Infectious morbidity was found in 29/108 (26.9%), 24/106 (22.6%) and 11/107 (10.3%) of patients in the placebo, ampicillin and cefazolin groups, respectively. There was a statistically significant difference between the placebo and cefazolin groups (P = 0.002). Between the placebo and ampicillin groups, the result was not significantly different (P = 0.476). There was a statistically significant difference between the cefazolin and ampicillin groups (P = 0.015). The common causes of infectious morbidity were urinary tract infection, vaginal cuff infection and surgical wound infection. We concluded that antibiotic prophylaxis by cefazolin should be recommended for elective total abdominal hysterectomy.