ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Episiotomy for Medical Indications during Vaginal Birth-Retrospective Analysis of Risk Factors Determining the Performance of This Procedure.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does the number of abnormal values in the oral glucose tolerance test impact pregnancy outcomes?BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Restrictive approach to episiotomy and the risk of third- and fourth-grade perineal tears: An analytical cross-sectional study at a rural tertiary hospital in South Africa.Journal of the colleges of medicine of South Africa · 2026Article
- Prevalence and predictors of episiotomy among puerperal women accessing postnatal care in the Kumasi Metropolis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Antenatal Anovaginal Distance, a Potential Indicator of Perineal Damage during Pregnancy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The WHO (World Health Organization) recommends that the percentage of perineal incisions should not exceed 10%, indicating that this is a good goal to achieve, despite the fact that it is still a frequently used medical intervention in Poland. The risk factors for perineal incision that have been analyzed so far in the literature allow, among others, to limit the frequency of performing this procedure. Are they still valid? Have there been new risk factors that we should take into account? We have conducted this study to find the risk factors for performing perineal incision that would reduce the frequency of this procedure. The aim of the study was to check whether the risk factors that were analyzed in the literature are still valid, to find new risk factors for perineal incisions and to compare them among Polish women. This was a single-center retrospective case-control study. The electronic patient records of Saint Sophia's Hospital in Warsaw, Poland, a tertiary hospital was used to create an anonymous retrospective database of all deliveries from 2015 to 2020. The study included the analysis of two groups, the study group of patients who had had an episiotomy, and the control group-patients without an episiotomy in cases where an episiotomy was indicated. A logistic regression model was developed to assess the risk factors for perineal laceration. Independent risk factors for episiotomy in labor include oxytocin use in the second stage of labor (OR (Odds Ratio) = 6.00; 95% CI (Confidence Interval): 4.76-7.58), the supply of oxytocin in the first and the second stage of labor (OR = 3.18; 95% CI: 2.90-3.49), oxytocin use in the first stage of labor (OR = 2.72; 95% CI: 2.52-3.51), state after cesarean section (OR = 2.97; 95% CI: 2.52-3.51), epidural anesthesia use (OR = 1.77; 95% CI: 1.62-1.93), male gender (OR = 1.10; 95% CI: 1.02-1.19), and prolonged second stage of labor (OR = 1.01; 95% CI: 1.01-1.01). A protective factor against the use of an episiotomy was delivery in the Birth Centre (OR = 0.43; 95% CI: 0.37-0.51) and mulitpara (OR = 0.31; 95% CI: 0.27-0.35). To reduce the frequency of an episiotomy, it is necessary consider the risk factors of performing this procedure in everyday practice, e.g., limiting the use of oxytocin or promoting alternative places of delivery.
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.