Literature DB >> 7902901

Routine vs selective episiotomy: a randomised controlled trial. Argentine Episiotomy Trial Collaborative Group.

.   

Abstract

Episiotomy is a widely-done intervention in childbirth, regardless of poor scientific evidence of its benefits. This randomised controlled trial compares selective with routine use of a mediolateral episiotomy for women having first and second deliveries in 8 public maternity units in Argentina. 2606 women participated; 1555 were nulliparous (778 in the selective group and 777 in the routine group) and 1051 primiparous (520 in the selective group and 531 in the routine group). The two interventions compared were selective (limited to specified maternal or fetal indications), and routine episiotomy (following the hospital's previous policy). Episiotomy was done in 30.1% of deliveries in the selective, and 82.6% in the routine group. The main outcome measure was severe perineal trauma. Severe perineal trauma was uncommon in both groups but was slightly less frequent in the selective group (1.2% vs 1.5%). Anterior perineal trauma was more common in the selective group but posterior perineal surgical repair, perineal pain, healing complications, and dehiscence were all less frequent in the selective group. Routine episiotomy should be abandoned and episiotomy rates above 30% cannot be justified.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 7902901

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  21 in total

1.  Medicalization and obstetric care: an analysis of developments in Dutch midwifery.

Authors:  Anke D J Smeenk; Henk A M J ten Have
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2003

2.  Routine episiotomy should be abandoned.

Authors:  J M Belizán; G Carroli
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-11-14

3.  Routine episiotomy in developing countries. Time to change a harmful practice.

Authors:  A Maduma-Butshe; A Dyall; P Garner
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-04-18

4.  Physician age and the abandonment of episiotomy.

Authors:  David H Howard; Jason Hockenberry
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2019-03-06       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  No episiotomy versus selective lateral/mediolateral episiotomy (EPITRIAL): an interim analysis.

Authors:  Lena Sagi-Dain; Rabia Bahous; Orna Caspin; Inna Kreinin-Bleicher; Ron Gonen; Shlomi Sagi
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2017-09-20       Impact factor: 2.894

6.  Hospital practice versus evidence-based obstetrics: categorizing practices for normal birth in an Egyptian teaching hospital.

Authors:  Karima Khalil; Amr Elnoury; Mohamed Cherine; Hania Sholkamy; Nevine Hassanein; Lamia Mohsen; Miral Breebaart; Abdel Aziz Shoubary
Journal:  Birth       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 3.689

Review 7.  Can pelvic floor injury secondary to delivery be prevented?

Authors:  Yuval Lavy; Peter K Sand; Chava I Kaniel; Drorith Hochner-Celnikier
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2011-08-06       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 8.  Selective versus routine use of episiotomy for vaginal birth.

Authors:  Hong Jiang; Xu Qian; Guillermo Carroli; Paul Garner
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-02-08

9.  Risk factors for anal sphincter disruption during child birth.

Authors:  D N Samarasekera; M T Bekhit; J P Preston; C T M Speakman
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2008-12-02       Impact factor: 3.445

Review 10.  Episiotomy for vaginal birth.

Authors:  Guillermo Carroli; Luciano Mignini
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2009-01-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.