ArticleEuropean journal of midwifery2024
Patient awareness, knowledge, and acceptability of antenatal perineal massage: A single-center cross-sectional study from Saudi Arabia.
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. 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.
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study assessed the knowledge, awareness, and acceptability of antenatal perineal massage (APM) among pregnant women in Saudi Arabia.
methodsThis cross-sectional study included 240 pregnant women who met the predefined inclusion criteria and attended the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, from 1 October to 31 December 2023. Participants answered seven knowledge questions, classified as having good knowledge if they answered ≥4 correctly and poor knowledge if <4 were correct.
resultsMost women (46.25%) reported it was their first encounter with APM. Common sources of information included the internet (39.58%), physicians/midwives (7.92%), and friends/family (3.75%). Nearly half (47.5%) had heard of APM, but only 8.75% had practiced it, and 3.75% attended related classes. Only 17.5% knew that APM could be performed by the woman or her partner, while 25.83% knew it should start at 34 weeks, and 17.92% recognized the recommended duration of 5 to 10 minutes daily. Additionally, 22.5%, 15.83%, and 35.42% acknowledged APM's benefits for labor duration, anal sphincter dysfunction, and perineal injuries, respectively. The average knowledge score was 1.39±1.84, with 84.17% classified as having poor knowledge. No significant differences were found between knowledge levels (p>0.05). Low acceptability was noted, with only 58% of patients and 37% of their partners willing to engage in APM. No significant differences in acceptability were found between poor and good knowledge groups (p>0.05).
conclusionsThe study revealed low awareness, poor knowledge, and weak acceptability of APM among pregnant patients. Targeted education for patients and healthcare providers could enhance knowledge and improve maternal-fetal health outcomes.
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.