ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2015
A retrospective study on perineal lacerations in vaginal delivery and the individual performance of experienced mifwives.
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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- The "Ideal Birth": The Occurrence of Severe Perineal Lacerations, Related Factors and the Possibility of Identifying Patients at Higher Risk.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Prediction model for obstetric anal sphincter injury using machine learning.International urogynecology journal · 2021Article
- Obstetric anal sphincter injury following previous vaginal delivery.International urogynecology journal · 2021Article
- Obstetric anal sphincter injury in adolescent mothers.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021Article
- Perineal Lacerations: A Retrospective Study in a Habitual-Risk Public Maternity.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2021Article
- Development and Psychometric Properties of the Women's Recovery of Postnatal Perineal Injuries Questionnaire (WRPPIQ).International journal of community based nursing and midwifery · 2020Article
- Risk and protective factors for obstetric anal sphincter injuries: A retrospective nationwide study.Birth (Berkeley, Calif.) · 2018Article
- Midwives' Management during the Second Stage of Labor in Relation to Second-Degree Tears-An Experimental Study.Birth (Berkeley, Calif.) · 2017Article
- Social Recovery: A Neglected Dimension of Caring for Women with Perineal Trauma in Iran.Iranian journal of nursing and midwifery researchArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedical staff's influence on patient outcomes has become a subject of interest. We evaluated experienced midwives and compared their performance concerning perineal lacerations (PL).
methodsIn a retrospective cohort study, 1937 women with singleton pregnancies who had delivered spontaneously with a cephalic presentation by experienced midwives in the Medical University of Vienna from January 2009 to April 2014 were included. As predictive parameters, we included basic patient-, pregnancy- and delivery-related characteristics including the individual midwife who delivered the child. The incidence of PL was the main outcome measure.
resultsOverall PL and severe PL were found in 508/1937 (26.2%) and 19/1937 women (1.0%), respectively. In a multivariate analysis for PL of any degree, maternal age (ß = 0.170 ± 0.080), gestational age at delivery (ß = 0.190 ± 0.320), and birth weight (ß = 0.002 ± 0.000) significantly increased the risk, whereas multiparity (ß = -0.379 ± 0.141) and mediolateral episiotomy (ß = -1.514 ± 0.284) decreased it (p < 0.05). In addition, the individual midwife who delivered the child was a significant influencing factor, with ß-values ranging from -0.028 to 0.899 compared to the reference midwife. For severe PL, the midwife was not of significant influence.
conclusionsThe individual midwife is an independent factor that influences the risk for overall PL, not for severe PL. Other risk factors include maternal age, gestational age at delivery, birth weight, parity and episiotomy.
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.