Episiotomy: Evolution of a Common Obstetric Practice at a Public Hospital
American Journal of Perinatology, ISSN: 1098-8785, Vol: 41, Issue: 1, Page: 39-43
2020
- 3Citations
- 13Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations3
- Citation Indexes3
- CrossRef1
- Captures13
- Readers13
- 13
- Mentions1
- News Mentions1
- 1
Most Recent News
Investigators at University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center Dallas Describe Findings in Obstetrics (Episiotomy: Evolution of a Common Obstetric Practice At a Public Hospital)
2024 FEB 21 (NewsRx) -- By a News Reporter-Staff News Editor at NewsRx Women's Health Daily -- New research on Surgery - Obstetrics is the
Article Description
Objective This study aimed to evaluate the rate and impact of episiotomy on maternal and newborn outcomes before and after restricted use of episiotomy. Study Design This population-based observational study used an obstetric database of all deliveries since 1990 that has been maintained with quality checks. Inclusion criteria were vaginal deliveries at ≥37 weeks. Exclusion criteria included fetal malformations, multifetal gestations, or fetal deaths known on arrival to Labor and Delivery. The primary outcomes of interest were episiotomy, perineal lacerations, and newborn outcomes. To evaluate the impact of restrictive episiotomy, data from 1990 to 1997 (35% overall episiotomy rate) were compared with data from 2010 to 2017 (2.5% overall episiotomy rate). Univariable analysis of maternal and infant outcomes were performed comparing the two-time epochs with the Pearson's Chi-squared test. Results Overall, 268,415 women met inclusion criteria and 49,089 (18.2%) had an episiotomy. The rate of episiotomy decreased from 37% of deliveries in 1990 to 2% in 2017. A total of 82,082 deliveries occurred in the 1990 to 1997 epoch and 57,183 in 2010 to 2017. Indicated use of episiotomy was associated with a significant decrease in third and fourth degree lacerations. Immediate newborn condition (5-minute Apgar's score ≤3 and umbilical artery pH <7.1) and neonatal outcomes (intraventricular hemorrhage [IVH] grade 3/4, positive culture sepsis, neonatal seizures, and neonatal demise) were not significantly different. Conclusion Selective, indicated use of episiotomy compared with routine was associated with lower rates of third/fourth-degree lacerations with no change in neonatal outcomes. The common obstetric practice of routinely performing episiotomy, presumably to prevent perineal trauma, proved untrue when analyzed over almost three decades. Key Points Episiotomy use decreased overtime at our institution. Decreased episiotomy use was associated with significant improvement in maternal outcomes. Neonatal outcomes were unchanged suggesting no deleterious effects with restricted episiotomy.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85121027991&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1739410; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34856609; http://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-0041-1739410; https://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1739410; https://www.thieme-connect.de/products/ejournals/abstract/10.1055/s-0041-1739410
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know