Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25879873›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2015

The impact of first birth obstetric anal sphincter injury on the subsequent birth: a population-based linkage study.

Amanda J Ampt, Christine L Roberts, Jonathan M Morris, Jane B Ford

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Risk factors for obstetric anal sphincter injury recurrence: A systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Amanda J AmptClinical and Population Perinatal Health Research, Kolling Institute, University of Sydney, Royal North Shore Hospital, Building 52, St Leonards, NSW, 2065, Australia. amanda.ampt@sydney.edu.au.
Christine L RobertsClinical and Population Perinatal Health Research, Kolling Institute, University of Sydney, Royal North Shore Hospital, Building 52, St Leonards, NSW, 2065, Australia. christine.roberts@sydney.edu.au.
Jonathan M MorrisClinical and Population Perinatal Health Research, Kolling Institute, University of Sydney, Royal North Shore Hospital, Building 52, St Leonards, NSW, 2065, Australia. jonathan.morris@sydney.edu.au.
Jane B FordClinical and Population Perinatal Health Research, Kolling Institute, University of Sydney, Royal North Shore Hospital, Building 52, St Leonards, NSW, 2065, Australia. jane.ford@sydney.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith rising obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) rates, the number of women at risk of OASI recurrence is in turn increasing. Decisions regarding mode of subsequent birth following an OASI are complex, and depend on a variety of factors. We sought to identify the risk factors for OASI recurrence from first and subsequent births, and to investigate the effect of OASI birth factors on planned caesarean for the second birth.

methodsUsing two linked population datasets from New South Wales, Australia, we selected women giving birth between 2001 and 2011 with a first birth OASI and a subsequent birth. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify the association of first and second birth factors with OASI recurrence, and to determine which factors were associated with a planned pre-labour caesarean at the second birth.

resultsOf 6,380 women with a first birth OASI who proceeded to a subsequent birth, 75.4% had a vaginal second birth, 19.4% a pre-labour caesarean, and 5.2% an intrapartum caesarean. Although the OASI recurrence rate of 5.7% was significantly higher than the first birth OASI rate of 4.5% (p < 0.01), this may not reflect a clinically significant increase. Following adjustment for first and second birth factors, first birth diabetes and second birthweight ≥3.5 kg were associated with increased likelihood of OASI recurrence, while first birthweight ≥4.0 kg and second gestation at 37-38 weeks were associated with decreased likelihood. A fourth degree tear at the first birth was the strongest factor associated with planned caesarean at the second birth, with other factors including epidural, spinal or general anaesthetic, birthweight, gestation, country of birth and maternal age.

conclusionsCompared with previous reports, the low OASI recurrence rate (approximately one in twenty) may reflect appropriate decision-making about subsequent mode of delivery following first birth OASI. This assertion is supported by evidence of different risk profiles for women who have planned caesareans compared with planned vaginal births.

Indexed as

Patient Care PlanningAdultAnal CanalBirth WeightCesarean SectionDelivery, ObstetricDiabetes, GestationalFemaleFetal MacrosomiaGestational AgeHumansInformation Storage and RetrievalLacerationsLogistic ModelsMultivariate AnalysisNew South Wales

Identifiers

PMID25879873
PMCPMC4339080

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.