ArticleEuropean journal of midwifery2023
Measurement of perineal tears as an additional tool for laceration assessment during vaginal birth.
Article in European journal of midwifery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
introductionSpontaneous lacerations at vaginal birth are everyday events, but their classification and management still challenge midwifery care. This study aims to measure and describe first-degree and second-degree perineal lacerations resulting from vaginal birth, describe their repair, and the education provided for care.
methodsA descriptive study was conducted in a public maternity hospital in São Paulo, Brazil, with 87 parturients. Data were collected between October 2017 and June 2018 using a structured instrument containing obstetric variables and a description of lacerations. The obstetricians and nurse midwives assisted with births, determining the degree of laceration and intervention, and the researchers measured and reported them.
resultsThe majority of parturients (82.7%) had lacerations only in the anterior region, 8% had them in the posterior region, and 9.2% in both regions. The lacerations were classified as first-degree (78.1%) or second-degree (21.8%). Among the 32 nulliparous parturients, 27.6% had first-degree lacerations, and 9.2% had second-degree. Of the 55 multiparous parturients, 50.6% had first-degree, and 12.6% had second-degree. Among the lacerations assessed as first-degree, 25% had deeper tissue layers compromised in addition to the skin and mucosa. There were 180 lacerations, with an average length of 33.1 mm, depth of 19.8 mm, and width of 23.8 mm. Half of the parturients did not receive guidance on laceration care. There was no association between parity and size, number, location, or degree classification of lacerations.
conclusionsThis study provides a broad description of the characteristics of perineal lacerations and presents measurement techniques as a complementary resource for evaluating lacerations.
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.