Development and validation of a protocol for documentation of obstetric perineal lacerations

Markus Harry Jansson, Kerstin Nilsson, Karin Franzén, Markus Harry Jansson, Kerstin Nilsson, Karin Franzén

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis: The aim of this study was to develop a new protocol for documentation of perineal lacerations and to validate the latter against the most common obstetric record system in Sweden. The hypothesis was that the new protocol would render more complete data on perineal lacerations than the current documentation method.

Methods: A protocol for documentation of perineal lacerations was developed to be sufficiently comprehensive to serve research purposes. All women delivering their first child vaginally from 13 October 2015 to 1 February 2016 at Örebro University Hospital were eligible for the validation study. Perineal lacerations were documented using the protocol in parallel with the regular obstetric record system (ObstetriX). Cross tabulations were used to compare the coverage regarding perineal lacerations between the two documentation methods. McNemar's test was used to evaluate systematic differences between the methods.

Results: A total of 187 women were included. The coverage of documentation regarding perineal laceration was significantly higher (p < 0.001) in the new protocol (89%) compared with ObstetriX (18%). Incidence of second-degree perineal tears was 26% according to the new protocol and 11% according to ObstetriX. The incidence of third-degree perineal tears A, B, and C was 2.7%, 2.1%, and 2.1%, respectively, according to the new protocol, and 3.2%, 2.7%, and 1.1% according to ObstetriX.

Conclusions: This validation study of a new documentation protocol showed that it delivered significantly more comprehensive information regarding perineal lacerations than the most common obstetric record system in Sweden.

Keywords: Health administrative data; Obstetric anal sphincter injuries; Perineal tear; Validation studies.

Conflict of interest statement

None.

References

    1. Samuelsson E, Ladfors L, Lindblom BG, Hagberg H. A prospective observational study on tears during vaginal delivery: occurrences and risk factors. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2002;81(1):44–49. doi: 10.1046/j.0001-6349.2001.10182.x.
    1. Smith LA, Price N, Simonite V, Burns EE. Incidence of and risk factors for perineal trauma: a prospective observational study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2013;13:59. doi: 10.1186/1471-2393-13-59.
    1. Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare [Socialstyrelsen]. Regional comparisons: equal health care (2015). Women’s health care: in-depth report. [Öppna jämförelser, jämlik vård (2015), Kvinnors hälso-och sjukvård, fördjupningsrapport.]
    1. Evers EC, Blomquist JL, McDermott KC, Handa VL. Obstetrical anal sphincter laceration and anal incontinence 5–10 years after childbirth. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;207(5):425.e1–425.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2012.06.055.
    1. Corton MM, McIntire DD, Twickler DM, Atnip S, Schaffer JI, Leveno KJ. Endoanal ultrasound for detection of sphincter defects following childbirth. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24:627. doi: 10.1007/s00192-012-1893-x.
    1. Romano PS, Yasmeen S, Schembri ME, Keyzer JM, Gilbert WM. Coding of perineal lacerations and other complications of obstetric care in hospital discharge data. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;106:717–725. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000179552.36108.6d.
    1. Brubaker L, Bradley CS, Handa VL, Richter HE, Visco A, Brown MB, et al. Anal sphincter laceration at vaginal delivery: is this event coded accurately? Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109(5):1141–1145. doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000260958.94655.f2.
    1. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. The management of third- and fourth-degree perineal tears. Green-Top Guideline No. 29, June 2015.
    1. World Health Organization . The ICD-10 classification of mental and behavioural disorders: clinical descriptions and diagnostic guidelines. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1992.
    1. Altman D. Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman & Hall. 1991.
    1. Benchimol EI, Manuel DG, To T, Griffiths AM, Rabeneck L, Guttmann A. Development and use of reporting guidelines for assessing the quality of validation studies of health administrative data. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(8):821–829. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.10.006.

Source: PubMed

Спонсоры и соавторы

Заболевания

Медикаментозные вмешательства

Подписаться