ArticleAJOG global reports2021
The knowledge and perceptions of healthcare workers regarding obstetrical anal sphincter injuries. A practice audit from a resource-constrained setting.
Article in AJOG global reports, 2021. 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.
- IUGA International Guidelines on Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injuries.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Obstetric Rectal Buttonhole Tear: Case Series, Literature Review, and Management Recommendations.International journal of women's health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe hypothesized that knowledge regarding obstetric anal sphincter injuries amongst healthcare workers in our setting is limited. A lack of knowledge would result in worsened clinical outcomes and proving this knowledge deficiency would allow us to institute educational programs to improve outcomes.
objectiveThis study aimed to assess the knowledge and perceptions of healthcare workers regarding obstetrical anal sphincter injuries in a resource-limited setting. STUDY
designQuestionnaires assessing the knowledge in classification, diagnosis, and management of obstetrical anal sphincter injuries were completed by 290 doctors and nurses involved in conducting vaginal deliveries at various levels of care (primary, district, regional, tertiary) in a resource-limited setting. Moreover, confidence in managing obstetrical anal sphincter injuries was assessed.
resultsAlthough the healthcare workers' knowledge of anatomy was poor, most healthcare workers knew how to define obstetrical anal sphincter injuries and classify these injuries. Most healthcare workers considered obstetrical anal sphincter injuries serious complications and perceived that patients with obstetrical anal sphincter injuries were best managed at a regional- or tertiary-level hospital. There was variation in choice of suture material and methods of repair, with most healthcare workers lacking confidence in managing obstetrical anal sphincter injuries and 96.9% of healthcare workers indicating a need for further training. Most healthcare workers felt that perineal support was the best intrapartum preventative strategy against obstetrical anal sphincter injuries.
conclusionHere, it was likely that knowledge and confidence in managing obstetrical anal sphincter injuries in most resource-limited settings were suboptimal, highlighting a need for ongoing training.
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.