Obstetric anal sphincter injuries and other delivery trauma: a US national survey of obstetrician-gynecologists.

introduction and hypothesisObstetric lacerations complicate the majority of deliveries. The application of standardized guidelines for assessing delivery trauma has not been assessed thoroughly in the United States. We recently identified gaps in US midwives' clinical assessment of delivery trauma. We conducted a cross-sectional national survey of practicing obstetricians in the USA to characterize their classification of obstetric lacerations. We hypothesized that attending obstetricians' identification and diagnosis of delivery trauma would be similar to our findings for midwives with frequent inaccuracy.

methodsWe recruited clinically active obstetricians through the Pregnancy-Related Care Research Network. We asked participants to classify (from written definitions) and diagnose (from standard illustrations) common forms of vaginal delivery trauma using the widely employed perineal laceration degree system. We performed bivariate analysis of high- and low-scoring respondents and logistic regression to model characteristics associated with higher diagnostic accuracy.

resultsOf the 162 respondents who started the survey, 76% (123) were included for analysis (22% of solicited emails). Overall, we found wide variation in response accuracy with as few as 62% of respondents correctly classifying certain types of lacerations. Only 49 out of 123 (40%) use the Sultan third-degree subclassification system and 67 out of 123 (52%) continue to use the midline/median approach for episiotomies. Providers reporting fewer deliveries per month and fewer publicly insured patients earned higher scores.

conclusionsObstetricians in a nationally representative US perinatal provider network inconsistently identify perineal and nonperineal lacerations. We found important clinical knowledge gaps, suggesting that vaginal delivery diagnoses in obstetric quality studies and pelvic floor research might be inaccurate.