ArticleEuropean journal of midwifery2024
Could a simple manual technique performed by a midwife reduce the incidence of episiotomy and perineal lacerations? A non-randomized pilot study.
Article in European journal of midwifery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
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
introductionWomen experience medical interventions, episiotomy, and perineal lacerations during childbirth, impacting their physical, psychological, and sexual well-being. This study compares the perineal status of prospective women who had the midwifery intervention of perineal myofascial release during childbirth, to a matched retrospective control sample of women who received standard care during childbirth.
methodsA non-randomized pilot study with prospective data collected for 50 women after informed verbal consent was obtained to having the midwifery intervention of perineal myofascial release during childbirth, and the matched retrospective data for the control group of 49 women were collected from a random sample generated from the medical records. Quantitative analyses included descriptive statistics, independent t-tests, regression, and chi-squared analyses. Retrospective trial registration was granted with The Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ANZTR.
resultsWomen were six times (OR=0.15; 95% CI: 0.0-0.37) less likely to have a non-intact perineum and twice (OR=0.44; 95% CI: 0.35-0.56) less likely to have an episiotomy if they were in the intervention group. Chi-squared analysis found no statistically significant differences between groups for normal vaginal birth and instrumental births, excluding cesareans and waterbirth [χ
conclusionsThis study found perineal myofascial release benefits women by reducing perineal trauma and episiotomy. However, there were no significant differences in the duration of the active pushing stage of labor or mode of birth. This study has shown some promise in obtaining data for a larger, definitive, randomized controlled trial. CLINICAL
trial registrationThe study was registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ANZTR. IDENTIFIER: ID ACTRN12623000807651.
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.