ArticleJournal of caring sciences2012
The effects of continuous and interrupted episiotomy repair on pain severity and rate of perineal repair: a controlled randomized clinical trial.
Article in Journal of caring sciences, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Continuous versus discontinuous suture in perineal injuries produced during delivery in primiparous women: a randomized controlled trial.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2019Trial
- Continuous non-locking vs. interrupted suturing techniques for the repair of episiotomy or second-degree perineal tears: A single-blind randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPerineal pain is the most common complaint after episiotomy. It imposes extra pressure on mothers who attempt to adapt to their new conditions. Therefore, the present study was performed to compare pain severity and perineal repair in two episiotomy repair methods.
methodsIn this clinical trial, 100 primiparous women who referred to hospitals of Tabriz (Iran) for delivery were randomly allocated into two groups of 50 to undergo either continuous or interrupted episiotomy repair. A visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to evaluate pain severity 12-18 hours after episiotomy repair and also 10 days after delivery. Perineal repair rate was also assessed using the REEDA (redness, edema, ecchymosis, discharge, and approximation) scoring scale. The obtained data was analyzed in SPSS15.
resultsStatistical tests did not show significant differences between the 2 groups in pain severity variations or REEDA scores at 12-18 hours and the 10th day after delivery. However, the mean required time for repair and the number of used threads were significantly lower in the continuous repair group (p < 0.001).
conclusionThe results of this study showed that pain severity and episiotomy repair rate were similar in the two methods. Nevertheless, shorter time of repair and fewer threads were required using the continuous repair method. Therefore, this method would provide better services for mothers and reduce the required time, energy, and costs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.