ArticleColorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland2024
A UK wide survey of general surgeons' experience of the primary repair of obstetric anal sphincter injuries.
Article in Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, 2024. 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.
- Randomized Comparison of Video Demonstration, Simulation-Based Training, and Combination Using Silicone-Latex Simulation for Anal Sphincter Injury Repair in Obstetrics and Gynecology Residents.International urogynecology journal · 2025Trial
- A UK wide survey of general surgeons' experience of the primary repair of obstetric anal sphincter injuries.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimObstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIs) are associated with devastating consequences, mainly faecal incontinence. A timely and correct repair is necessary to reduce the risk of maternal morbidity. The aim was to explore the experience and practice of on-call general surgeons in the acute repair of OASIs.
methodA cross-sectional, observational questionnaire study was performed. Registrars and consultants participating in an emergency general surgical rota in the UK were included. A 33-item questionnaire was disseminated over a 9-month period from April 2023. A descriptive, thematic analysis of the data was undertaken.
resultsIn all, 310 responses were analysed. 42.3% of colorectal respondents (of which 29% were pelvic floor specialists), 24.3% of general surgeons, 16.7% of hepato-biliary surgeons and 13.7% of upper gastrointestinal surgeons were contacted to assist with an acute repair. Of those contacted, 52.3% typically assisted with a 3C or 4 tear, 54.2% received no training and 95.5% performed less than three acute repairs in the previous year. 57.6% of all respondents were not confident at all in the repair of these injuries, 55% highlighted a lack of experience and 36% mentioned a curricular gap.
conclusionSurgeons may be called to assist with an acute OASI repair, particularly in cases of severe anatomical disruption. This occurs infrequently. There is a lack of consensus as to who is responsible for these injuries. Obstetricians have structured training in both the recognition and repair of these injuries. This paper serves to highlight the lack of training for surgeons who report doing this surgery despite lacking the required competences.
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.