ArticleScientific reports2026
The effect of a pelvic floor training program on perineal trauma during birth: a patient-preference controlled clinical trial.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) is widely recommended for the prevention of urinary incontinence, but its potential to prevent perineal trauma during childbirth remains uncertain. We investigated whether a structured antenatal PFMT program could reduce severe perineal trauma and positively influence selected obstetric and neonatal outcomes. This prospective, non-randomized, patient-preference controlled trial was conducted at two tertiary centers between December 2, 2024, and September 2, 2025. Low-risk nulliparous women (defined as singleton, cephalic pregnancy at term without medical complications) at ≥ 28 gestational weeks were invited to participate. Those who consented formed the PFMT group, and those who declined received standard antenatal care. The intervention consisted of twice-weekly supervised PFMT sessions plus daily home exercises (3 sets of 8–12 maximal contractions) until 34 weeks of gestation. To minimize detection bias, clinicians assessing perineal outcomes were blinded to group allocation. The primary outcome was severe perineal trauma, defined as third- or fourth-degree obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI). Secondary outcomes included episiotomy rate, first- and second-degree perineal tears, duration of the second stage of labor, postpartum urinary incontinence, and 5-minute Apgar score < 7. Between-group comparisons were performed using t-tests or chi-square tests, with effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals reported. Of 358 women screened, 300 completed the study (PFMT n = 150, Control n = 150). Severe perineal trauma was significantly lower in the PFMT group (4.0% vs. 14.7%; OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.09–0.64, p = 0.009). The second stage of labor was significantly shorter in the PFMT group (49.7 ± 6.4 vs. 58.8 ± 20.4 min, p < 0.001). No significant between-group differences were observed regarding secondary outcomes, including episiotomy rates (p = 0.157), postpartum urinary incontinence (p = 0.645), or adverse neonatal outcomes. Structured antenatal PFMT may reduce severe perineal trauma and shorten the second stage of labor without compromising neonatal outcomes. These findings support the integration of PFMT into antenatal care, although larger randomized trials with long-term follow-up are warranted to confirm these results.
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.