Base de datos - (CIANE) | |
Presentación de esta base de datos documental (Sitio web de CIANE) |
https://ciane.net/id=2552 | ➡ Editar este registro |
Ficha bibliográfica (sin autores) : | Pelvic floor disorders 4 years after first delivery: a comparative study of restrictive versus systematic episiotomy - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology - Vol. 115, 2 - ISBN: 1471-0528 - p.247-252 |
Autores : | Fritel, X; Schaal, Jp; Fauconnier, A; Bertrand, V; Levet, C; Pigné, A |
Año de publicación : | 2008 |
URL(s) : | http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1471-… |
Résumé (français) : |
|
Abstract (English) : | Objective To compare two policies for episiotomy: restrictive and systematic. Design Quasi-randomised comparative study. Setting Two French university hospitals with contrasting policies for episiotomy: one using episiotomy restrictively and the second routinely. Population Seven hundred and seventy-four nulliparous women delivered during 1996 of a singleton in cephalic presentation at a term of 37–41 weeks. Methods A questionnaire was mailed 4 years after delivery. Sample size was calculated to allow us to show a 10% difference in the prevalence of urinary incontinence with 80% power. Main outcome measures Urinary incontinence, anal incontinence, perineal pain, and pain during intercourse. Results We received 627 responses (81%), 320 from women delivered under the restrictive policy, 307 from women delivered under the routine policy. In the restrictive group, 186 (49%) deliveries included mediolateral episiotomies and in the routine group, 348 (88%). Four years after the first delivery, there was no difference in the prevalence of urinary incontinence (26 versus 32%), perineal pain (6 versus 8%), or pain during intercourse (18 versus 21%) between the two groups. Anal incontinence was less prevalent in the restrictive group (11 versus 16%). The difference was significant for flatus (8 versus 13%) but not for faecal incontinence (3% for both groups). Logistic regression confirmed that a policy of routine episiotomy was associated with a risk of anal incontinence nearly twice as high as the risk associated with a restrictive policy (OR = 1.84, 95% CI: 1.05–3.22). Conclusions A policy of routine episiotomy does not protect against urinary or anal incontinence 4 years after first delivery. |
Sumário (português) : |
|
Resumen (español) : | |
Comentarios : | |
Argument (français) : |
|
Argument (English): |
|
Argumento (português): |
|
Argumento (español): | |
Palabras claves : | |
Autor de este registro : | Import 02/08/2014 — 02 Aug 2014 |
Debate (mostrar sólo español) | ||
---|---|---|
Realizar otra consulta de expertos --- Realice otra consulta sencilla
Creación de un registro --- Importación de registros
Gestión de usuarios --- Salvaguardar la base de datos --- Contacto
Esta base de datos creada por la Alliance francophone pour l'accouchement respecté (AFAR) está gestionada
por el Collectif interassociatif autour de la naissance (CIANE, https://ciane.net).
Se nutre de las contribuciones de voluntarios interesados en compartir información científica.
Si está de acuerdo con este proyecto, puede ayudarnos de varias maneras:
(1) convertirse en colaborador de esta base de datos, si tiene alguna experiencia en documentación
(2) ou apoio financeiro CIANE (veja abaixo)
(3) o hacerse miembro de otra asociación afiliada al CIANE.
➡ Inicie sesión o cree una cuenta para seguir los cambios o convertirse en editor.
➡ Contacta con bibli(arobase)ciane.net para más información.
Donar a CIANE (haga clic en 'Faire un don') nos ayudará a mantener y desarrollar sitios y bases de datos públicas para apoyar las decisiones informadas de los progenitores y profesionales de la salud con respecto al parto |