INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Episiotomy is regarded as the most common maternal obstetric surgical procedure. It is associated with a significant increase in blood loss, lower pelvic floor muscle strength, dyspareunia, and perineal pain compared with a perineal tear. We tested the hypothesis that all doctors and midwives can perform an episiotomy when prompted to, specifically cut at 60° from the midline (in a simulation model). METHODS: Doctors and midwives attending the BMFMS Annual Meeting (2014), Croydon Perineal Trauma Course and staff at Poole General Hospital were invited to cut a paper replica of the perineum with a commonly used episiotomy incision pad. Participants were prompted to cut an episiotomy at 60° to the perineal midline with the anus as a reference point. The angles and distances were measured using protractors and rulers. A 58-62° band was deemed acceptable to account for measurement errors. RESULTS: A total of 106 delegates participated. Only 15 % of doctors and midwives cut an episiotomy between 58 and 62°. Over one third (36 %) cut the episiotomy between 55 and 65° (inclusive). Nearly two thirds either underestimated the angle (<55°; 44 %), or overestimated the angle (>66°; 18 %). Thirty-six and 7.5 % of episiotomies were cut at <50 and >70° respectively. The origination point of the episiotomy was 5 mm away from the midline (IQR 1-8 mm). CONCLUSIONS: This original observational study shows that doctors and midwives were poor at cutting at the prompted episiotomy angle of 60°. This highlights the need to develop structured training programmes to improve the visual accuracy of estimating angles or the use of fixed angle devices to help improve the ability to estimate the desired angle.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Episiotomy is regarded as the most common maternal obstetric surgical procedure. It is associated with a significant increase in blood loss, lower pelvic floor muscle strength, dyspareunia, and perineal pain compared with a perineal tear. We tested the hypothesis that all doctors and midwives can perform an episiotomy when prompted to, specifically cut at 60° from the midline (in a simulation model). METHODS: Doctors and midwives attending the BMFMS Annual Meeting (2014), Croydon Perineal Trauma Course and staff at Poole General Hospital were invited to cut a paper replica of the perineum with a commonly used episiotomy incision pad. Participants were prompted to cut an episiotomy at 60° to the perineal midline with the anus as a reference point. The angles and distances were measured using protractors and rulers. A 58-62° band was deemed acceptable to account for measurement errors. RESULTS: A total of 106 delegates participated. Only 15 % of doctors and midwives cut an episiotomy between 58 and 62°. Over one third (36 %) cut the episiotomy between 55 and 65° (inclusive). Nearly two thirds either underestimated the angle (<55°; 44 %), or overestimated the angle (>66°; 18 %). Thirty-six and 7.5 % of episiotomies were cut at <50 and >70° respectively. The origination point of the episiotomy was 5 mm away from the midline (IQR 1-8 mm). CONCLUSIONS: This original observational study shows that doctors and midwives were poor at cutting at the prompted episiotomy angle of 60°. This highlights the need to develop structured training programmes to improve the visual accuracy of estimating angles or the use of fixed angle devices to help improve the ability to estimate the desired angle.
Authors: Douglas G Tincello; Abimbola Williams; Gillian E Fowler; Elisabeth J Adams; David H Richmond; Zarko Alfirevic Journal: BJOG Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 6.531
Authors: Hadil Y Ali-Masri; Sahar J Hassan; Kaled M Zimmo; Mohammed W Zimmo; Khaled M K Ismail; Erik Fosse; Hasan Alsalman; Åse Vikanes; Katariina Laine Journal: Obstet Gynecol Int Date: 2018-10-29
Authors: Nadia Rahman; Latha Vinayakarao; Sangeeta Pathak; Dawn Minden; Louise Melson; Ella Vitue; A Pradhan Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2016-10-25 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Posy Bidwell; Ranee Thakar; Ipek Gurol-Urganci; James M Harris; Louise Silverton; Alexandra Hellyer; Robert Freeman; Edward Morris; Vivienne Novis; Nick Sevdalis Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-09-09 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: I Gurol-Urganci; P Bidwell; N Sevdalis; L Silverton; V Novis; R Freeman; A Hellyer; J van der Meulen; R Thakar Journal: BJOG Date: 2020-08-09 Impact factor: 6.531
Authors: Posy Bidwell; Ranee Thakar; Nick Sevdalis; Louise Silverton; Vivienne Novis; Alexandra Hellyer; Megan Kelsey; Jan van der Meulen; Ipek Gurol-Urganci Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2018-08-13 Impact factor: 3.007