Literature DB >> 27783118

Evaluation of training programme uptake in an attempt to reduce obstetric anal sphincter injuries: the SUPPORT programme.

Nadia Rahman1, Latha Vinayakarao2, Sangeeta Pathak3, Dawn Minden2, Louise Melson2, Ella Vitue3, A Pradhan4.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective was to assess the feedback from a quality improvement training programme to reduce obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS).
METHODS: Training sessions were organised that included evidence-based information on OASIS risk factors and training on models to measure perineal body length (PBL), perform episiotomies with standard and 60° fixed angle scissors (EPISCISSORS-60®), and measure post-delivery episiotomy suture angles with protractor transparencies. Feedback forms using a Likert scale (1-4) were completed and analysed. The setting was an evidence-based quality improvement programme (Strategy for Using Practical aids for Prevention of OASIS, Recording episiotomies and clinician Training [SUPPORT]) at two National Health Service (NHS) Hospitals in the UK. The participants were midwives and doctors attending the SUPPORT training programme
RESULTS: All of the participants (100 %) would recommend the training programme to a friend or colleague. 92 % felt that the training session improved their knowledge of the impact of PBL and perineal distension and their knowledge of the relationship between episiotomy angle and OASIS "a lot" or "somewhat".
CONCLUSION: Based on this feedback, we recommend the addition of the knowledge content of the SUPPORT programme to other centres providing perineal assessment and repair courses.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Manual perineal protection; Obstetric anal sphincter injuries; Perineal body length; Preventing episiotomies; Quality improvement

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27783118     DOI: 10.1007/s00192-016-3158-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urogynecol J        ISSN: 0937-3462            Impact factor:   2.894


  16 in total

1.  Medscape's response to the Institute of Medicine Report: Crossing the quality chasm: a new health system for the 21st century.

Authors:  M Leavitt
Journal:  MedGenMed       Date:  2001-03-05

2.  Cutting an episiotomy at 60 degrees: how good are we?

Authors:  Madhu Naidu; Dharmesh S Kapoor; Sarah Evans; Latha Vinayakarao; Ranee Thakar; Abdul H Sultan
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2015-02-06       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  Evaluation of accuracy of mediolateral episiotomy incisions using a training model.

Authors:  K Silf; N Woodhead; J Kelly; A Fryer; C Kettle; K M K Ismail
Journal:  Midwifery       Date:  2014-09-02       Impact factor: 2.372

4.  Severe perineal lacerations in nulliparous women and episiotomy type.

Authors:  Hakan Aytan; Omer L Tapisiz; Gorkem Tuncay; Filiz A Avsar
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol       Date:  2005-07-01       Impact factor: 2.435

5.  Determinants of the length of episiotomy or spontaneous posterior perineal lacerations during vaginal birth.

Authors:  Diaa E E Rizk; Mary N Abadir; Letha B Thomas; Fikri Abu-Zidan
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2005-01-20

6.  Developing core patient-reported outcomes in maternity: PRO-Maternity.

Authors:  A Mahmud; E Morris; S Johnson; K M Ismail
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 6.531

7.  Association of spontaneous perineal stretching during delivery with perineal lacerations.

Authors:  Asnat Walfisch; Mordechai Hallak; Shlomit Harlev; Moshe Mazor; Ilana Shoham-Vardi
Journal:  J Reprod Med       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 0.142

8.  Is the policy of restrictive episiotomy generalisable? A prospective observational study.

Authors:  Chit Ying Lai; Hiu Wah Cheung; Terence Tzu Hsi Lao; Tze Kin Lau; Tak Yeung Leung
Journal:  J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med       Date:  2009-12

9.  How good are we at implementing evidence to support the management of birth related perineal trauma? A UK wide survey of midwifery practice.

Authors:  Debra E Bick; Khaled M Ismail; Sue Macdonald; Peter Thomas; Sue Tohill; Christine Kettle
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2012-06-25       Impact factor: 3.007

10.  Perineal Assessment and Repair Longitudinal Study (PEARLS): a matched-pair cluster randomized trial.

Authors:  Khaled M K Ismail; Christine Kettle; Sue E Macdonald; Sue Tohill; Peter W Thomas; Debra Bick
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2013-09-23       Impact factor: 8.775

View more
  1 in total

1.  Episcissors-60™ and obstetrics anal sphincter injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Olga Divakova; Aethele Khunda; Paul A Ballard
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2019-03-02       Impact factor: 2.894

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.