Incidence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries after training to protect the perineum: cohort study

Katariina Laine, Finn Egil Skjeldestad, Leiv Sandvik, Anne Cathrine Staff, Katariina Laine, Finn Egil Skjeldestad, Leiv Sandvik, Anne Cathrine Staff

Abstract

Objective: To compare the incidence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS) in two time periods, before and after implementing a training programme for improved perineal support aimed at reducing the incidence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries. The secondary aim was to study incidence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries in subgroups defined by risk factors for OASIS.

Design: Population-based cohort study.

Setting: University hospital setting in Oslo, Norway.

Participants: Two cohorts of all delivering women in the largest hospital in Norway during two time periods (2003-2005 and 2008-2010) were studied. After excluding caesarean sections and preterm deliveries (< week 32), the study population consisted of 31 709 deliveries, among which 907 women were identified with obstetric anal sphincter injury.

Primary and secondary outcome measures: Incidence of OASIS in two time periods. Maternal, obstetrical and foetal risk factors for OASIS were collected from the hospital obstetric database. Univariate analyses and multivariate logistic regression analyses, presenting adjusted ODs for OASIS, were performed.

Results: The OASIS incidence was significantly reduced by 50%, from 4% (591/14787) in the first time period to 1.9% (316/16 922) in the second. This reduction could not be explained by changes in population characteristics or OASIS risk factors during the study years. The reduction of incidence of OASIS between the two study periods was consistent across subgroups of women; regardless of parity, delivery method and infant birth weight.

Conclusions: A marked reduction in the incidence of OASIS was observed in all studied subgroups of women after implementing the training programme for perineal protection. Further, this reduction could not be explained by the differences in patient characteristics across the study period. These findings indicate that the training programme with improved perineal protection markedly reduced the risk of OASIS.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Frequency of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (%) for different delivery methods during the study years.

References

    1. Räisänen S, Vehviläinen-Julkunen K, Gissler M, et al. Up to seven-fold inter-hospital differences in obstetric anal sphincter injury rates—a birth register-based study in Finland. BMC Res Notes 2010;3:345.
    1. Laine K, Gissler M, Pirhonen J. Changing incidence of anal sphincter tears in four Nordic countries through the last decades. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2009;146:71–5
    1. Pirhonen JP, Grenman SE, Haadem K, et al. Frequency of anal sphincter rupture at delivery in Sweden and Finland—result of difference in manual help to the baby's head. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1998;77:974–7
    1. Prager M, Andersson KL, Stephansson O, et al. The incidence of obstetric anal sphincter rupture in primiparous women: a comparison between two European delivery settings. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2008;87:209–15
    1. Baghestan E, Irgens LM, Bordahl PE, et al. Trends in risk factors for obstetric anal sphincter injuries in Norway. Obstet Gynecol 2010;116:25–34
    1. Laine K, Skjeldestad FE, Sanda B, et al. Prevalence and risk factors for anal incontinence after obstetric anal sphincter rupture. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2011;90:319–24
    1. Bols EM, Hendriks EJ, Berghmans BC, et al. A systematic review of etiological factors for postpartum fecal incontinence. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2010;89:302–14
    1. Norderval S, Nsubuga D, Bjelke C, et al. Anal incontinence after obstetric sphincter tears: incidence in a Norwegian county. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2004;83:989–94
    1. de Leeuw JW, de Wit C, Kuijken JP, et al. Mediolateral episiotomy reduces the risk for anal sphincter injury during operative vaginal delivery. BJOG 2008;115:104–8
    1. Räisänen SH, Vehviläinen-Julkunen K, Gissler M, et al. Lateral episiotomy protects primiparous but not multiparous women from obstetric anal sphincter rupture. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2009;88:1365–72
    1. Räisänen S, Vehviläinen-Julkunen K, Gissler M, et al. High episiotomy rate protects from obstetric anal sphincter ruptures: a birth register-study on delivery intervention policies in Finland. Scand J Public Health 2011;39:457–63
    1. Dahl C, Kjolhede P. Obstetric anal sphincter rupture in older primiparous women: a case-control study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2006;85:1252–8
    1. Bowling CB, Wheeler Ii TL, Gerten KA, et al. Sphincter tears in primiparous women: is age a factor? Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 2008;179:600–4
    1. Gerdin E, Sverrisdottir G, Badi A, et al. The role of maternal age and episiotomy in the risk of anal sphincter tears during childbirth. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2007;47:286–90
    1. Räisänen S, Vehviläinen-Julkunen K, Gissler M, et al. The increased incidence of obstetric anal sphincter rupture—an emerging trend in Finland. Prev Med 2009;49:535–40
    1. Ekeus C, Nilsson E, Gottvall K. Increasing incidence of anal sphincter tears among primiparas in Sweden: a population-based register study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2008;87:564–73
    1. Laine K, Pirhonen T, Rolland R, et al. Decreasing the incidence of anal sphincter tears during delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2008;111:1053–7
    1. Hals E, Øian P, Pirhonen T, et al. A multicenter interventional program to reduce the incidence of anal sphincter tears. Obstet Gynecol 2010;116:901–8
    1. Roos AM, Thakar R, Sultan AH. Outcome of primary repair of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS): does the grade of tear matter? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2010;36:368–74
    1. Coats PM, Chan KK, Wilkins M, et al. A comparison between midline and mediolateral episiotomies. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1980;87:408–12
    1. Hirsch E, Haney EI, Gordon TE, et al. Reducing high-order perineal laceration during operative vaginal delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008;198:668.e1,668.e5
    1. Jönsson ER, Elfaghi I, Rydhström H, et al. Modified Ritgen's maneuver for anal sphincter injury at delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2008;112:212–17
    1. McCandlish R, Bowler U, van Asten H, et al. A randomised controlled trial of care of the perineum during second stage of normal labour. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;105:1262–72
    1. Mayerhofer K, Bodner-Adler B, Bodner K, et al. Traditional care of the perineum during birth. A prospective, randomized, multicenter study of 1,076 women. J Reprod Med 2002;47:477–82
    1. Albers LL, Sedler KD, Bedrick EJ, et al. Midwifery care measures in the second stage of labor and reduction of genital tract trauma at birth: a randomized trial. J Midwifery Womens Health 2005;50:365–72
    1. de Leeuw JW, Struijk PC, Vierhout ME, et al. Risk factors for third degree perineal ruptures during delivery. BJOG 2001;108:383–7
    1. Räisänen S, Vehviläinen-Julkunen K, Gissler M, et al. Hospital-based lateral episiotomy and obstetric anal sphincter injury rates: a retrospective population-based register study. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2012;206:347.e1,347.e6
    1. Zafran N, Salim R. Impact of liberal use of mediolateral episiotomy on the incidence of obstetric anal sphincter tear. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2012;286:591–7
    1. Williams A, Tincello DG, White S, et al. Risk scoring system for prediction of obstetric anal sphincter injury. BJOG 2005;112:1066–9
    1. Harkin R, Fitzpatrick M, O'Connell PR, et al. Anal sphincter disruption at vaginal delivery: is recurrence predictable? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2003;109:149–52
    1. Varma A, Gunn J, Lindow SW, et al. Do routinely measured delivery variables predict anal sphincter outcome? Dis Colon Rectum 1999;42:1261–4

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren