Choose your font:
 Arimo
 Merriweather
 Mukta Malar
 Open Sans Condensed
 Rokkitt
 Source Sans Pro
 Login


 English 
 Français 
 Português 
 Español 

[Valid RSS] RSS
bar

Database - (CIANE)

Description of this bibliographical database (CIANE website)
Currently 3111 records
YouTube channel (tutorial)

https://ciane.net/id=2532

Created on : 02 Aug 2014
Modified on : 02 Aug 2014

 Modify this record
Do not follow this link unless you know an editor’s password!


Share: Facebook logo   Tweeter logo   Hard

Bibliographical entry (without author) :

Need for and consequences of episiotomy in vaginal birth: a critical approach - Midwifery - Vol. 26, 3 - ISBN: 0266-6138 - p.348-356

Author(s) :

Räisänen, Sari; Vehviläinen-Julkunen, Katri; Heinonen, Seppo

Year of publication :

2010

URL(s) :

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S…
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2008.07.007

Résumé (français)  :

Abstract (English)  :

Objective
to describe and explain the short-term effects of lateral episiotomy, and determine the factors associated with more/less common use of episiotomy.
Design
prospective cross-sectional survey using a postal questionnaire.
Setting
the study was conducted at two university hospitals and one regional hospital in Finland between October and December 2006. The hospitals were chosen using cluster sampling. The sample consisted of 1000 vaginal births, and data were collected using questionnaires which were completed by midwives or student midwives. The overall response rate was 88%.
Participants
midwives or student midwives who took care of the women in labour provided information about childbearing women (n=879), obstetric factors and details of staff experience.
Findings
episiotomies were more common among primiparous than multiparous women (55% vs 12%, p⩽0.001). More common use of episiotomy was also associated with induced births compared with spontaneous births in primiparous women (66% vs 53%, p=0.036), assisted vaginal births in all women (89% vs 25%, p⩽0.001), and a prolonged active second stage of labour and epidural analgesia (17% vs 10%, p=0.036) in multiparous women. Correspondingly, episiotomies were less common among primiparous (44% vs 57%, p=0.041) and multiparous (7% vs 16%, p=0.003) women using spontaneous pushing compared with coached pushing. In the active second stage of labour, alternative birth positions (lateral, squatting, all fours, sitting) were associated with less common use of episiotomy than half-sitting or lithotomy positions among primiparous women (22% vs 48% vs 85%, p⩽0.001). There were no differences between primiparous women with and without episiotomy in low Apgar score at 1 minute (10.6% vs 6.4%, p=0.131) or 5 minutes (1.8% vs 1.1%, p=0.557), or between multiparous women with and without episiotomy in low Apgar score at 1 minute (1.9% vs 2.2%, p=0.855) or 5 minutes (0% vs 0.5%, p=0.603). There were more first- and second-degree perineal injuries as well as injuries to the vagina, labia minora and urethra in births performed without episiotomies among primiparous women (p⩽0.001). Correspondingly, third-degree perineal injuries were more common if episiotomy was performed in both primiparous (2.2% vs 1.6%) and multiparous women (3.7% vs 0%). The maternity hospital was the most significant determinant of the episiotomy rate (odds ratio 1 vs 1.9 vs 2.6, p=0.049).
Key conclusions
episiotomy rates can be reduced without causing harm to women or newborn babies. Episiotomies can be avoided if induction and vacuum assistance are used sparingly, and if spontaneous pushing techniques and alternative birth positions (lateral, sitting, squatting, all fours) are used more often during labour.

Sumário (português)  :

Resumen (español)  :

Comments :

Argument (français) :

Argument (English):

Argumento (português):

Argumento (español):

Keywords :

➡ episiotomy

Author of this record :

Import 02/08/2014 — 02 Aug 2014

Discussion (display only in English)
 
➡ Only identified users



 I have read the guidelines of discussions and I accept all terms
[Hide guidelines]

➡ Discussion guidelines

1) Comments aim at clarifying the content of the publication or suggesting links for a better comprehension of its topic
2) All comments are public and opinions expressed belong to their authors
3) Avoid casual talk and personal stories
4) Any off-topic comment or containing inappropriate statements will be deleted without notice

barre

New expert query --- New simple query

Creating new record --- Importing records

User management --- Dump database --- Contact

bar

This database created by Alliance francophone pour l'accouchement respecté (AFAR) is managed
by Collectif interassociatif autour de la naissance (CIANE, https://ciane.net).
It is fed by the voluntary contributions of persons interested in the sharing of scientific data.
If you agree with this project, you can support us in several ways:
(1) contributing to this database if you have a minimum training in documentation
(2) or financially supporting CIANE (see below)
(3) or joining any society affiliated with CIANE.
Sign in or create an account to follow changes or become an editor.
Contact bibli(arobase)ciane.net for more information.

Valid CSS! Valid HTML!
Donating to CIANE (click “Faire un don”) will help us to maintain and develop sites and public
databases towards the support of parents and caregivers’ informed decisions with respect to childbirth