ArticleEuropean journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X2022
Women acceptance of episiotomy procedure before and after receiving educational materials: Pretest posttest study.
Article in European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology: X, 2022. 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.
- National trends of episiotomy in non-instrumental vaginal deliveries (2013-2022): A multi-data source approach.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Article
- An Evaluation of Polish Women's Knowledge of Perineal Incision: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Episiotomy is a frequently performed surgical procedure by obstetricians and midwives during vaginal birth. It is defined as a surgical incision in the perineal area through the second stage of delivery. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate women's acceptance toward episiotomy before and after providing education. Methods: A Quasi-experiment pretest posttest study was conducted on a total of 234 patients attending antenatal clinics in Maternity and Children hospital and Heraa General hospital in Makkah during June-August 2021. Participants were personally interviewed and provided with evidence-based information about the procedure then re-evaluated by the investigators. The statistical analysis was carried using Two Tailed Tests. Statistical significance was set on a P value of 0.05 or less. Results: Total of 234 participant fulfilling the inclusion criteria were interviewed. Females mean age is 26.2 ± 9.7 years. Exact of 115 (49.1%) women heard about episiotomy. And 79 (33.8%) correctly described it as a surgical incision. Also, 89 (38%) understood that it is not recommended for all, and 109 (46.6%) knew that anesthesia is required. The most reported source of information was internet/ social media (49%; 72), followed by friends/relatives (35.4%; 52). Before education, 112 (47.9%) would accept episiotomy if required which was significantly improved to be among 173 (73.9%) of them after receiving the educational materials. Conclusion: Due to the controversial opinions and practices of episiotomy, ensuring patients awareness and understanding is crucial. Providing correct information from trusted sources will help minimizing the chances of receiving inaccurate information from unreliable sources. Therefore, making wrong decisions, and refusing needed episiotomy. Health practitioners should be encouraged to discuss patients' concerns and correct their misconceptions.
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.