Effect of Perineal Massage and Warm Compresses Technique in Postpartum Pelvic Floor Dysfunction. A Secondary Analysis from a Randomised Controlled Trial.

Pelvic floor dysfunction (PFD) is common to be associated with pregnancy and birth. To date, no research has been done to understand whether the perineal massage and warm compresses technique has an impact on pelvic floor dysfunction. To assess the impact of perineal massage and warm compresses technique during the second stage of labor in pelvic floor dysfunction at 3 and 6 months postpartum. Of the 800 women recruited to randomised controlled trial to prevent perineal trauma, 496 were included in the study, with 242 (48.8%) assigned to the Perineal Massage and Warm Compresses (PeMWaC) group and 254 (51.2%) to the control group (hands-on). Used the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory-20 (PFDI-20). The questionnaire is divided into three subscales: Urinary (UDI), Colorectal-Anal (CRADI), and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Distress Inventory (POPDI). The PeMWaC group had a significantly higher frequency of intact perineum (p < 0.001) and low-severity vaginal tears (tears without any other degree of perineal trauma) (p = 0.031) compared to the control group, while the control group had significantly more patients who suffered high-severity vaginal/perineal trauma (second degree perineal tears) (p = 0.031) and patients without spontaneous perineal trauma or vaginal tears who underwent episiotomy (p < 0.001). In addition, at 3 months postpartum, women in the control group had a higher Urinary Distress Inventory (UDI) score and global score, compared to the PeMWaC group, and after controlling for confounding variables, the perineal massage and warm compresses technique was associated with lower UDI scores at 3 months postpartum compared to control group. At 6 months postpartum, there were no differences in the UDI or global scores, indicating general recovery from perineal trauma. In addition to reducing perineal trauma during birth, the perineal massage and warm compresses technique was associated with a lower prevalence of early PFD symptoms, mainly urinary distress, at 3 months.Trial registration http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05854888, retrospectively registered.

Preventing, assessing and treating skin tears.

Skin tears are acute wounds caused by mechanical forces resulting in the separation of the skin's outer layers. Skin tears are more likely to occur in vulnerable people such as older people and people with neurodegenerative conditions. Rising life expectancy means that the number of patients with skin tears is expected to increase. This article describes the characteristics of skin tears, details the risk factors for skin tears and explains the importance of using a holistic, evidence-based and person-centred approach to skin tear prevention, assessment and treatment. The article outlines the crucial role of nurses as part of the multidisciplinary team in the management of skin tears.

Efficacy of perineal massage during the second stage of labor for the prevention of perineal injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Numerous interventions to reduce perineal trauma during childbirth have been studied in recent years, including perineal massage. OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of perineal massage during the second stage of labor to prevent perineal damage. SEARCH STRATEGY: Systematic search in PubMed, Pedro, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, BioMed, SpringerLink, EBSCOhost, CINAHL, and MEDLINE with the terms Massage, Second labor stage, Obstetric delivery, and Parturition. SELECTION CRITERIA: The articles must have been published in the last 10 years; the perineal massage was administered to the study sample; and the experimental design consisted of randomized controlled trial. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Tables were used to describe both the studies' characteristics and the extracted data. The PEDro and Jadad scales were used to assess the quality of studies. MAIN RESULTS: Of the 1172 total results identified, nine were selected. Seven studies were included in the meta-analysis and indicated a statistically significant decreased number of episiotomies in perineal massage. CONCLUSIONS: Massage during the second stage of labor appears to be effective in preventing episiotomies and reducing the duration of the second stage of labor. However, it does not appear to be effective in reducing the incidence and severity of perineal tears.

Effects of different techniques during the second stage of labour on reducing perineal laceration: An overview of systematic reviews.

AIM AND OBJECTIVE: To summarize the evidence on the effects of different techniques during the second stage of labour on reducing perineal laceration depending on available systematic reviews to provide optimal evidence for decision-making. BACKGROUND: Preventing perineal laceration has been considered an important part of improving women's health. Various techniques have been used to prevent perineal laceration during the second stage of labour. However, systematic reviews evaluating the effects of different techniques on reducing perineal laceration show inconsistent results. DESIGN: Overview of systematic reviews. METHODS: Five English and four Chinese databases were systematically searched for relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses published between 1 January 2016 and 31 August 2021. The quality of the included reviews was assessed by the AMSTAR 2 tool. A narrative synthesis was conducted to report the results of moderate-to-high quality systematic reviews. The overview was reported according to the PRISMA statement. RESULTS: Eighteen reviews were included, of which four reviews had moderate-to-high methodological quality. Perineal massage and warm compresses significantly decreased the incidence of third- or fourth-degree perineal laceration (moderate-quality evidence). Hands-off technique had no impact on perineal laceration (low-to-moderate quality evidence). Ritgen's manoeuvre could reduce the incidence of first-degree perineal laceration but increase the incidence of second-degree perineal laceration (very low-quality evidence). Spontaneous pushing (low-quality evidence) and delayed pushing (moderate-quality evidence) had no impact on the incidence of third- or fourth-degree perineal laceration. Upright positions did not increase the risk of third- or fourth-degree perineal laceration (very low- to low-quality evidence) but increased the risk of second-degree perineal laceration for women without epidural analgesia (low-quality evidence). CONCLUSIONS: Perineal massage and warm compresses could be the better choice for preventing perineal laceration in the second stage of labour. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Midwives and obstetricians could use perineal massage and warm compresses to prevent perineal laceration and should consider women's preferences and experience with perineal techniques.

Effect of Prenatal Perineal Massage on Postpartum Perineal Injury and Postpartum Complications: A Meta-Analysis.

Background: The efficacy of perineal massage is controversial. The study was aimed at comparing the effects of perineal massage on perineal injury and complications. Methods: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ISI Web of Science were searched for literature on the relationship between prenatal perineal massage and postpartum perineal injury and complications until April 2022. Indicators included postpartum perineal tears, perineotomy, postpartum perineal pain, natural labour, and postpartum incontinence. Finally, RevMan5.4 software was used to analyze the extracted data. Results: A total of 6487 subjects in 16 studies were included, with 3211 who received perineal massage and 3276 did not. There was no significant difference in 1-2 degree perineal tearing between the intervention group and the control group (RR = 0.96, 95% CI [0.90, 1.03], P = 0.30), and there was no heterogeneity between studies (P = 0.62, I 2 = 0%), indicating publication bias. Compared with the control group, prenatal perineal massage significantly reduced the incidence of 3-4 degree perineal tears (RR = 0.56, 95% CI [0.47, 0.67], P < 0.00001), and there was no heterogeneity between studies (P = 0.16, I 2 = 30%), indicating publication bias. Compared with the control group, prenatal perineal massage reduced the risk of lateral perineal resection (RR = 0.87, 95% CI [0.80, 0.95], P = 0.001), and there was no heterogeneity between studies (P = 0.14, I 2 = 31%), and there was no publication bias. Compared with the control group, prenatal perineal massage reduced the risk of postpartum pain at 3 months (RR = 0.64, 95% CI [0.51, 0.81], P = 0.0002). There was no significant heterogeneity among studies (P = 0.23, I 2 = 31%). Conclusion: Compared with no prenatal perineal massage, prenatal perineal massage can reduce the risk of perineal injury, the incidence of lateral perineal resection, and the incidence of long-term pain.

Massagem perineal pré-natal para prevenção do trauma: piloto de ensaio clínico randomizado / Masaje perineal prenatal para la prevención del trauma: piloto de ensayo clínico aleatorizado / Antenatal perineal massage for trauma prevention: a pilot randomized clinical trial

Resumo Objetivo Avaliar a adesão de gestantes e acompanhantes à realização da massagem perineal digital durante a gestação e seu efeito na prevenção do trauma perineal no parto e na redução de morbidade associada nos 45 e 90 dias pós-parto. Métodos Estudo piloto de ensaio clínico randomizado com 153 gestantes de risco habitual, 78 mulheres no grupo de intervenção realizaram a massagem perineal digital e 75 mulheres do grupo controle receberam os cuidados habituais. Para a análise do desfecho principal (trauma perineal) e dos desfechos secundários, permaneceram em cada grupo 44 mulheres que tiveram parto vaginal. A intervenção foi realizada pela gestante ou acompanhante de sua escolha, diariamente, a partir de 34 semanas de gestação, por 5 a 10 minutos. Resultados A massagem perineal foi fator de proteção para edema nos primeiros 10 dias pós-parto (RR 0,64 IC95%0,41-0,99) e perda involuntária de gases nos 45 dias pós-parto (RR0,57 IC95%0,38-0,86). O ajuste residual ≥ 2 observado na análise das condições do períneo pós-parto mostrou uma tendência das mulheres do grupo intervenção terem períneo íntegro. As mulheres e os acompanhantes que realizaram a massagem perineal aceitaram bem a prática, recomendariam e fariam novamente em futura gestação. Conclusão A massagem perineal digital realizada diariamente, a partir de 34 semanas de gestação, foi uma prática bem aceita pelas mulheres e acompanhantes deste estudo. Apesar de não proteger a mulher de trauma perineal, esta prática reduziu o risco de edema 10 dias pós-parto e incontinência de gases 45 dias pós-parto. Registro Brasileiro de ensaio clínico: RBR-4MSYDX

Resumen Objetivo Evaluar la participación de mujeres embarazadas y acompañantes en la realización del masaje digital perineal durante el embarazo y su efecto en la prevención del trauma perineal durante el parto y en la reducción de la morbilidad asociada con los 45 y 90 días post parto. Métodos Estudio piloto de ensayo clínico aleatorizado con 153 mujeres embarazadas con riesgo normal, 78 mujeres en el grupo de intervención realizaron el masaje digital perineal y 75 mujeres del grupo control recibieron los cuidados habituales. Para el análisis del desenlace principal (trauma perineal) y de los desenlaces secundarios, permanecieron en cada grupo 44 mujeres que tuvieron parto vaginal. La intervención la realizó la mujer embarazada o el acompañante por ella elegido, diariamente, a partir de las 34 semanas de embarazo, por 5 a 10 minutos. Resultados El masaje perineal fue factor de protección para el edema en los primeros 10 días postparto (RR 0,64 IC95%0,41-0,99) y la pérdida involuntaria de gases en los 45 días post parto (RR0,57 IC95%0,38-0,86). El ajuste residual ≥ 2 observado en el análisis de las condiciones del perineo postparto mostró una tendencia en las mujeres del grupo intervención a que tengan el perineo íntegro. Las mujeres y los acompañantes que realizaron el masaje perineal recibieron bien la práctica, la recomendarían y la harían nuevamente en un futuro embarazo. Conclusión El masaje digital perineal realizado diariamente, a partir de las 34 semanas de embarazo, fue una práctica bien recibida por las mujeres y acompañantes de este estudio. Pese a que no protege a la mujer de un trauma perineal, esta práctica redujo el riesgo de edema a los 10 días post parto y la incontinencia de gases 45 días post parto.

Abstract Objective To evaluate the adherence of pregnant women and companions to the performance of digital perineal massage during pregnancy and its effect on the prevention of perineal trauma during childbirth and on the reduction of associated morbidity at 45 and 90 days postpartum. Methods A pilot study of a randomized clinical trial with 153 normal risk pregnant women; 78 women in the intervention group underwent digital perineal massage and 75 women in the control group received usual care. For the analysis of the main outcome (perineal trauma) and secondary outcomes, 44 women who had vaginal delivery remained in each group. The intervention was performed daily by the pregnant woman or the companion of her choice from 34 weeks of gestation during 5-10 minutes. Results Perineal massage was a protective factor for edema in the first 10 days postpartum (RR 0.64 95%CI 0.41-0.99) and involuntary gas loss at 45 days postpartum (RR0.57 95%CI 0.38-0.86). The residual adjustment ≥ 2 observed in the analysis of perineal conditions postpartum showed a trend of women in the intervention group having an intact perineum. The women and companions who performed perineal massage accepted the practice well, recommended it and would do it again in a future pregnancy. Conclusion The digital perineal massage performed daily from 34 weeks of gestation was a practice well accepted by women of this study and their companions. Although not protecting women from perineal trauma, this practice reduced the risk of edema at 10 days postpartum and gas incontinence at 45 days postpartum. Brazilian Clinical Trial Registry: RBR-4MSYDX

Perineal massage during labor: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Background: Different techniques have been analyzed to reduce the risk of perineal trauma during labor.Objective: To evaluate whether perineal massage techniques during vaginal delivery decreases the risk of perineal trauma.Search strategy: Electronic databases (Medline, Prospero, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, Embase, ScienceDirect, the Cochrane Library, SciELO) were searched from their inception until February 2018. No restrictions for language or geographic location were applied.Selection criteria: We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the use of perineal massage during labor (i.e. intervention group) with a control group (i.e. no perineal massage) in women with singleton gestation and cephalic presentation at ≥36 weeks. Perineal massage was defined as massage of the posterior perineum by the clinician's fingers (with or without lubricant). Trials on perineal massage during antenatal care, before the onset of labor, or only in the early part of the first stage, were not included.Data collection and analysis: All analyses were done using an intention-to-treat approach. The primary outcome was severe perineal trauma, defined as third and fourth degree perineal lacerations. Meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model of DerSimonian and Laird to produce summary treatment effects in terms of either a relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).Main results: Nine trials including 3374 women were analyzed. All studies included women with singleton pregnancy in cephalic presentation at ≥36 weeks undergoing spontaneous vaginal delivery. Perineal massage was usually done by a midwife in the second stage, during or between and during pushing time, with the index and middle fingers, using a water-soluble lubricant. Women randomized to receive perineal massage during labor had a significantly lower incidence of severe perineal trauma, compared to those who did not (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.25-0.94). All the secondary outcomes were not significant, except for the incidence of intact perineum, which was significantly higher in the perineal massage group (RR 1.40, 95% 1.01-1.93), and for the incidence of episiotomy, which was significantly lower in the perineal massage group (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.38-0.82).Conclusions: Perineal massage during labor is associated with significant lower risk of severe perineal trauma, such as third and fourth degree lacerations. Perineal massage was usually done by a midwife in the second stage, during or between and during pushing time, with the index and middle fingers, using a water-soluble lubricant.

Manual perineal protection: The know-how and the know-why.

Manual perineal protection is an obstetric intervention to mitigate the risk of perineal trauma. There are two effective techniques (Finnish and Viennese) with minor but distinctive differences in between them. The main aim of this study was to explore clinicians' knowledge about the manual perineal protection technique they use. The study took place in three maternity units that support manual perineal protection policy in three European countries (Czech Republic, Slovenia and the UK). Our study demonstrated that the majority of participants are aware of the concept of manual perineal protection. However, there were significant differences between staff responses regarding their views and experience with manual perineal protection in general. Less than 6% of respondents were able to provide an accurate account of the actual maneuvers they perform when manually protecting the perineum. Although this is not necessarily synonymous with suboptimal performance, it highlights the potential need to give more attention to the theory that underpins the technical skill in manual perineal protection training programs.

'Hands-off/poised' or 'Hands-on' method among Chinese midwives: A cross-sectional survey.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To determine midwives' preference for "Hands-on" and "Hands-off/poised" methods and to explore the impact factors. BACKGROUND: With the increasing rate of obstetric anal sphincter injuries, great controversy surrounds the "Hands-on" or "Hands-off" method during childbirth to decrease obstetric anal sphincter injuries incidence. Without regular records and related research, determining the use of this technique in China is difficult. DESIGN: This study used a quantitative study design, following the EQUATOR guidelines (STROBE). METHODS: A nationwide cross-sectional online survey was conducted using respondent-driven sampling across 31 provinces in China from 1st October 2017-31st December 2017. A total of 6,425 midwives were involved. Descriptive analyses, chi-square test and binary logistic regression were undertaken. RESULTS: A total of 5,225 questionnaires were returned; 55.8% of the participants preferred the "Hands-off/poised" method. The impact factors included hospital categories, total work experience in a birth unit in years, theoretical education and skill training. In the study, for situations with increased OASI risk, 100% of the midwives in the "Hands-off" group expressed willingness to change to the "Hands-on" method whether there was concern about impending obstetric anal sphincter injuries. CONCLUSION: The "Hands-off/poised" method is heavily practised by Chinese midwives. However, majority of the midwives adopt "Hands-on" method in the face of high risk for obstetric anal sphincter injuries. Further studies are needed to determine the association between obstetric anal sphincter injuries rate and perineal management for low-risk birth. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The result indirectly illustrates the application of "Hands-off/poised" technique in China and provides evidence for the international midwifery organisation to understand the status of Chinese midwifery to some extent. It also provides the latest data for further study of these two methods and the study of the relationship between hands-off/poised method and obstetric anal sphincter injuries.

Effects of perineal preparation techniques on tissue extensibility and muscle strength: a pilot study.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Perineal preparation techniques for childbirth have been used with the aim of reducing perineal tears during the expulsive phase of labor. However, no studies were found to investigate the effects of instrument-assisted stretching versus perineal massage on pelvic floor muscle (PFM) variables. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of instrument-assisted stretching versus perineal massage on the extensibility and strength of the PFMs. METHODS: Primiparous women were randomized to the instrument-assisted stretching (IStr) group (n = 13) and perineal massage (PnM) group (n = 14). The groups participated in eight sessions, twice weekly, beginning at the 34th gestational week. The IStr group underwent the intervention for 15 min using EPI-NO®. The PnM group underwent a perineal massage protocol for 10 min. Each woman was evaluated by a blinded physiotherapist before, after four and after eight sessions for primary (PFM extensibility using the EPI-NO® circumference) and secondary (PFM strength using a manometer) outcomes. Covariate analysis (ANCOVA) was used to compare the groups using the baseline values as a covariate. RESULTS: Both groups showed an increase in PFM extensibility compared with the evaluations before and after four and eight sessions (PnM group from 17.6 ± 1.8 to 20.2 ± 1.9 cm; IStr group from 19.9 ± 1.6 to 22.9 ± 1.6 cm;p < 0.001). There was no difference between groups. Regarding muscle strength, no statistical differences were observed between evaluations or between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Instrument-assisted stretching and perineal massage increase extensibility and do not alter the strength of PFMs in pregnant women.

Perineal outcome following educational intervention: a retrospective audit of primiparous women.

The management of vaginal delivery appears to offer an opportunity to reduce the morbidity of pelvic floor dysfunction (PFD) which is very common in the postpartum period. Research by the authors suggests that an episiotomy is protective against PFD, in particular urinary incontinence. The aim of this subsequent audit was to see if educational intervention can alter the common medical practice of episiotomy and in turn reduce postpartum PFD. Nine hundred and fifty four primiparous women with a non-instrumental vaginal delivery were included, of which 30% had an intact perineum, 51% a spontaneous tear and 19% an episiotomy. The intervention was a teaching session by the Head of Urogynaecology encompassing the anatomy, the impact of a vaginal delivery on PFD, in addition to local and international research. Whilst no significant difference was noted overall in the episiotomy rates as a result of the educational intervention (p = .17), significant differences were noted with the different accoucheur types. Where the accoucheur was an obstetrician or obstetrics registrar, the episiotomy rates increased from 56% to 70% (p < .01); where the midwife was the accoucheur the episiotomy rate changed minimally (11-18%, respectively; p = .27). This demonstrates that feedback about the provider's own practice patterns can change the behaviour to conform with the agreed upon standards. Impact Statement What is already known on this subject? Pelvic floor dysfunction (PFD) is the most common complication of childbirth, affecting approximately 85% of Australian women following a vaginal delivery. A link has been made between the perineal outcome and PFD, which has a significant impact on the quality of life. Previous research suggests that the management of a vaginal delivery offers an opportunity to reduce its morbidity, with an episiotomy being protective. However, there is a wide variation in the use of episiotomy which ranges from 9% to 100%. What the results of this study add? The literature suggests that the strongest factor associated with the episiotomy rates arises from differences in the attitude and training. Consequently, this study explored whether an educational intervention can change the common medical practice of episiotomy and in turn reduce postpartum PFD. What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? No significant difference was noted overall in the episiotomy rates as a result of the educational intervention, however, the response to the educational intervention was varied among the different types of accoucheurs with the obstetricians, obstetric registrars and student midwives significantly increasing their rate of episiotomy, whilst the midwives demonstrated no significant change. This suggests that there are contributing factors which may include past education and experience; this is an area for further research.

[Methods of preventing perineal injury and dysfunction during pregnancy: CNGOF Perineal prevention and protection in obstetrics]. / Quelles interventions au cours de la grossesse diminuent le risque de lésions périnéales ? RPC Prévention et protection périnéale en obstétrique CNGOF.

OBJECTIVE: Several interventions during pregnancy have been described that might prevent the risk of postnatal perineal injury or dysfunction; these include prenatal perineal massage, use of the Epi-No device, and pelvic floor muscle training exercises. Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of these different interventions during pregnancy. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted on PubMed, including articles in French and English published before May 2018, to evaluate the effectiveness of these different interventions on perineal protection in the post-partum period. RESULTS: Perineal massage during pregnancy diminishes the episiotomy rate (LE1) as well as post-partum perineal pain and flatus (LE2). It does not reduce the rate of either OASIS (LE1) or post-partum urinary incontinence (LE2). The Epi-No device does not provide benefits for perineal protection (LE1). Prenatal pelvic floor muscle training exercises do not reduce the risk of perineal lacerations (LE2); they reduce the prevalence of post-partum urinary incontinence at 3 to 6 months but not at 12 months post-partum (LE2). CONCLUSION: Perineal massage during pregnancy must be encouraged among women who want it (Grade B). The use of the Epi-No device during pregnancy is not recommended for the prevention of OASIS (grade B). Pelvic floor muscle training during pregnancy is not recommended for the prevention of OASIS (grade B); moreover, its absence of effect in the medium term does not allow us to recommend it for urinary incontinence (professional consensus).

Effectiveness of antenatal perineal massage in reducing perineal trauma and post-partum morbidities: A randomized controlled trial.

AIM: The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of antenatal perineal massage (APM) in reducing perineal trauma and post-partum morbidities. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial of 108 primigravidae at the University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital, Enugu, Nigeria, was conducted from January 2013 to May 2014. The intervention group received APM, while the control group did not receive APM. RESULTS: Women who received APM were significantly more likely to have an intact perineum after childbirth [27/53 (50.9%) vs 16/55 (29.1%); RR: 1.75; 95% CI: 1.07-2.86; P = 0.02]. The incidence of episiotomy was lower in the intervention group [20/53 (37.7%) vs 32/55 (58.2%); RR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.43-0.98; P = 0.03; NNT = 5]. Women who received APM were significantly less likely to develop flatus incontinence [4/53 (8.3%) vs 13/55 (26.0%); RR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.11-0.91; P = 0.03]. However, the incidences of premature rupture of membranes, preterm labor and birth asphyxia were similar between the two groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: APM reduces the incidence of episiotomy and increases the incidence of women with an intact perineum after vaginal delivery. It also reduces the risk of flatus incontinence after childbirth without increased maternal or neonatal complications. Women should therefore be counseled on the likely benefits of APM and the information provided during antenatal care. Obstetricians should consider the technique as routine prenatal care for nulliparous women so as to reduce the incidence of perineal trauma during vaginal birth.

Incidence of Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injuries After Training to Protect the Perineum.

OBJECTIVES: Obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASISs) are a devastating postpartum complication; reducing rates is paramount to improving quality of care. In Norway, implementation of a perineal protection program decreased the incidence of OASIS by 48%. We sought to assess impact on OASIS rates following a similar program. METHODS: This institutional review board-approved, retrospective cohort study was performed in an academic hospital system. The periods of analysis were November 2014 through October 2015 for the preintervention arm and November 2015 through October 2016 for the postintervention arm. From November 2 to 6, 2015, 2 Norwegian experts conducted a didactic and hands-on, on-site workshop focusing on perineal protection. The experts were then present on labor and delivery wards to reinforce perineal protection in live deliveries. Teachings were emphasized at departmental meetings for the remainder of the year. Data were extracted from electronic medical records and manually audited. RESULTS: The rate of vaginal delivery was similar among both periods (6504 and 6650; P = 0.059). Obstetric anal sphincter injury rates decreased from 211 (3.2%) preintervention to 189 (2.8%) after the workshop. Although this represented 32 fewer injuries, it was not statistically significant (P = 0.179). Obstetric anal sphincter injuries following forceps-assisted deliveries did decline significantly from 103 (28%) to 81 (21%) (P = 0.014). In addition, incidence of fourth-degree lacerations during resident deliveries decreased significantly from 10 (0.6%) to 3 (0.2%) (P = 0.047). CONCLUSIONS: An educational workshop focusing on perineal support was not associated with a significant reduction in overall OASIS rates. Nevertheless, decreased forceps-related OASIS and fourth-degree lacerations rates support positive influence of the intervention.

Interventional program to reduce both the incidence of anal sphincter tears and rate of Caesarean sections.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the ability of an intensive interventional program to decrease the number of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS), while simultaneously decreasing the rate of Caesarean sections (CS). STUDY DESIGN: The intervention, which aimed at decreasing the number of OASIS, started with a compulsory tutorial for all the midwives and physicians. At the same time, the clinic initiated a program to decrease the number of CS. We compared the outcomes before and after the intervention by calculating the risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals. The changes in selected outcomes were also tested using the test of relative proportions. The follow-up was extended for 1 year after the intervention. RESULTS: The number of deliveries by CS decreased significantly, as did the number of OASIS in all the subgroups, except for the multi-parous women. The rate of OASIS for instrumental deliveries (mostly by vacuum) decreased significantly (p < 0.003), as compared to pre-interventional period. The number of Grade 4 tears decreased significantly: from 0.4 ruptures per 100 deliveries before the start of the intervention to 0.1 ruptures after the start of the intervention (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.14-0.98, p = 0.037). However, the OASIS and Grade 4 sphincter injuries increased with forceps delivery. The CS rate decreased from 17.7 to 15.0 per 100 deliveries (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.78-0.93). The post-interventional follow-up period revealed a further decrease in the frequency of OASIS (to 1.28%, p < 0.001) and a stable CS rate (14.2%). CONCLUSION: The intervention significantly decreases the frequency of OASIS, in line with the results obtained for earlier interventions. At the same time, a decrease in CS rate was obtained.

Scientific evidence on perineal trauma during labor: Integrative review.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the scientific evidence for management and preservation of perineal integrity during the expulsive stage of labor. STUDY DESIGN: Integrative review that employed the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome strategy to formulate the research question: Which perineal measure(s) is(are) effective in maintaining perineal integrity during labor? The search was performed in the databases MEDLINE, LILACS, BDENF and SciELO. The ten selected studies were analyzed based on their level of evidence and grade of recommendation. RESULTS: Four categories of measures were located: antenatal perineal care, perineal massage during the expulsive phase of labor, manual perineal support during the expulsive phase of labor and perineal hyaluronidase injection. CONCLUSION: Based on its level of evidence, perineal massage with lubricants performed by the women or their partners at the end of pregnancy may be recommended as a measure favorable for perineal protection.

Midwifery management of second-degree perineal tears in New Zealand: A cross-sectional survey of practice.

BACKGROUND: Second-degree tears are the most common form of perineal trauma occurring after vaginal birth managed by New Zealand midwives, although little is known about midwives' perineal practice. AIM: The aim of this study was to identify how midwives managed the last second-degree perineal tear they treated and the level to which their practice reflects National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines. METHODS: An (anonymous) online survey was conducted over a six-week period in 2013. New Zealand midwives who self-identified as currently practising perineal management and could recall management of the last second-degree tear they treated were included in the analysis. FINDINGS: Of those invited, 645 (57.1% self-employed, 42.9% employed) were eligible and completed surveys. Self-employed midwives reported greater confidence (88.0% vs 74.4%, p<0.001) and more recent experience (85.1% vs 57.4%, p<0.001) with perineal repair than employed midwives. Midwives who left the last second-degree tear unsutured (7.3%) were more likely to report low confidence (48.9% vs 15.4%, p<0.001) and less recent experience with repair (53.2% vs 24.7%, p<0.001), and were less likely to report a digital-rectal examination (10.6% vs 49.0%, p<0.001), compared to midwives who sutured. Care consistent with evidence-based guidelines (performing a digital-rectal examination, 59.4% vs 49.3% p=0.005; optimal suturing techniques, 62.2% vs 48.7%, p=0.001) was associated with recent perineal education. CONCLUSIONS: Midwives' management of the last second-degree perineal tear is variable and influenced by factors including: employment status, experience, confidence, and perineal education. There is potential for improvement in midwives' management through increased uptake of evidence-based guidelines and through ongoing education.

Perineal techniques during the second stage of labour for reducing perineal trauma.

BACKGROUND: Most vaginal births are associated with trauma to the genital tract. The morbidity associated with perineal trauma can be significant, especially when it comes to third- and fourth-degree tears. Different interventions including perineal massage, warm or cold compresses, and perineal management techniques have been used to prevent trauma. This is an update of a Cochrane review that was first published in 2011. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of perineal techniques during the second stage of labour on the incidence and morbidity associated with perineal trauma. SEARCH METHODS: We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (26 September 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Published and unpublished randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials evaluating perineal techniques during the second stage of labour. Cross-over trials were not eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data and evaluated methodological quality. We checked data for accuracy. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-two trials were eligible for inclusion (with 20 trials involving 15,181 women providing data). Overall, trials were at moderate to high risk of bias; none had adequate blinding, and most were unclear for both allocation concealment and incomplete outcome data. Interventions compared included the use of perineal massage, warm and cold compresses, and other perineal management techniques.Most studies did not report data on our secondary outcomes. We downgraded evidence for risk of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision for all comparisons. Hands off (or poised) compared to hands onHands on or hands off the perineum made no clear difference in incidence of intact perineum (average risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.12, two studies, Tau² 0.00, I² 37%, 6547 women; moderate-quality evidence), first-degree perineal tears (average RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.77, two studies, 700 women; low-quality evidence), second-degree tears (average RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.28, two studies, 700 women; low-quality evidence), or third- or fourth-degree tears (average RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.21 to 2.26, five studies, Tau² 0.92, I² 72%, 7317 women; very low-quality evidence). Substantial heterogeneity for third- or fourth-degree tears means these data should be interpreted with caution. Episiotomy was more frequent in the hands-on group (average RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.79, Tau² 0.07, I² 74%, four studies, 7247 women; low-quality evidence), but there was considerable heterogeneity between the four included studies.There were no data for perineal trauma requiring suturing. Warm compresses versus control (hands off or no warm compress)A warm compress did not have any clear effect on the incidence of intact perineum (average RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.21; 1799 women; four studies; moderate-quality evidence), perineal trauma requiring suturing (average RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.66; 76 women; one study; very low-quality evidence), second-degree tears (average RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.56; 274 women; two studies; very low-quality evidence), or episiotomy (average RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.23; 1799 women; four studies; low-quality evidence). It is uncertain whether warm compress increases or reduces the incidence of first-degree tears (average RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.38 to 3.79; 274 women; two studies; I² 88%; very low-quality evidence).Fewer third- or fourth-degree perineal tears were reported in the warm-compress group (average RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.79; 1799 women; four studies; moderate-quality evidence). Massage versus control (hands off or routine care)The incidence of intact perineum was increased in the perineal-massage group (average RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.73, six studies, 2618 women; I² 83% low-quality evidence) but there was substantial heterogeneity between studies). This group experienced fewer third- or fourth-degree tears (average RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.94, five studies, 2477 women; moderate-quality evidence).There were no clear differences between groups for perineal trauma requiring suturing (average RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.61, one study, 76 women; very low-quality evidence), first-degree tears (average RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.79 to 3.05, five studies, Tau² 0.47, I² 85%, 537 women; very low-quality evidence), or second-degree tears (average RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.12, five studies, Tau² 0.32, I² 62%, 537 women; very low-quality evidence). Perineal massage may reduce episiotomy although there was considerable uncertainty around the effect estimate (average RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.03, seven studies, Tau² 0.43, I² 92%, 2684 women; very low-quality evidence). Heterogeneity was high for first-degree tear, second-degree tear and for episiotomy - these data should be interpreted with caution. Ritgen's manoeuvre versus standard careOne study (66 women) found that women receiving Ritgen's manoeuvre were less likely to have a first-degree tear (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.69; very low-quality evidence), more likely to have a second-degree tear (RR 3.25, 95% CI 1.73 to 6.09; very low-quality evidence), and neither more nor less likely to have an intact perineum (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.31; very low-quality evidence). One larger study reported that Ritgen's manoeuvre did not have an effect on incidence of third- or fourth-degree tears (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.96,1423 women; low-quality evidence). Episiotomy was not clearly different between groups (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.03, two studies, 1489 women; low-quality evidence). Other comparisonsThe delivery of posterior versus anterior shoulder first, use of a perineal protection device, different oils/wax, and cold compresses did not show any effects on perineal outcomes. Only one study contributed to each of these comparisons, so data were insufficient to draw conclusions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Moderate-quality evidence suggests that warm compresses, and massage, may reduce third- and fourth-degree tears but the impact of these techniques on other outcomes was unclear or inconsistent. Poor-quality evidence suggests hands-off techniques may reduce episiotomy, but this technique had no clear impact on other outcomes. There were insufficient data to show whether other perineal techniques result in improved outcomes.Further research could be performed evaluating perineal techniques, warm compresses and massage, and how different types of oil used during massage affect women and their babies. It is important for any future research to collect information on women's views.

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

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.

Reducing obstetric anal sphincter injuries using perineal support: our preliminary experience.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIs) are associated with significant short-term and long-term morbidity. Over the past decade, there has been a steady rise in the rate of OASIs. There is therefore a compelling need to identify strategies to minimize OASIs. The objective of this study was to determine if perineal support at the time of vaginal delivery can reduce the incidence and severity of OASIs. METHODS: All labour ward staff including midwives and doctors were invited to train in the technique of perineal support during vaginal delivery. Two experts from Norway conducted workshops with practical hands-on training on pelvic models. The midwives and doctors underwent further training with women in labour, and mandatory training was continued within the department. All midwives and doctors were instructed to support the perineum during both spontaneous and assisted vaginal delivery. RESULTS: From April 2011 to November 2014, 11,135 women underwent vaginal delivery. The OASI rate decreased from 4.7 % to 4.1 % (p = 0.11). There was a significant reduction (0.9 % to 0.3 %, p < 0.001) in 3c third-degree and fourth-degree tears (major OASIs). In a multivariate analysis, perineal support was associated with a significant reduction in the rates of OASIs (23 %; OR 0.77, 95 % CI 0.63 - 0.95, p = 0.01]) and major OASIs (71 %; OR 0.34, 95 % CI 0.17 - 0.69, p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: This interventional study showed that perineal support during vaginal delivery can reduce the risk of major OASIs. With sustained reinforcement of this intervention programme, we anticipate a further reduction in OASI rates.