Comparative study of episiotomy angles achieved by cutting with straight Mayo scissors and the EPISCISSORS-60 in a birth simulation model.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: We compared the clinician's ability to cut episiotomies at the recommended 60° angle with traditional straight Mayo scissors compared with patented fixed-angle episiotomy scissors EPISCISSORS-60® in a simulated setting using mounted incision pads. The hypothesis was that fixed-angle episiotomies would achieve a more accurate cutting angle of 60°. METHODS: Angles were cut on episiotomy incision pads in a mounted birth model simulating crowning: 110 midwives and doctors cut an 60° episiotomy with Mayo scissors and then EPISCISSORS-60. Angles were measured with protractors. Average angles were calculated and the one-tailed paired t test was used to compare groups. RESULTS: Mean angle was 45° with Mayo scissors [SD = 9, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 43.3-46.7, interquartile range (IQR) 38-50] and 60° with the EPISCISSORS-60 (SD = 3, 95% CI = 59.3-60.7, IQR = 58-60). Two-thirds of cuts with Mayo scissors were below 50°. CONCLUSIONS: In a simulated setting the majority of operators are unable to cut an episiotomy at the recommended 60° angle with Mayo scissors. The EPISCISSORS-60 cut an episiotomy a statistically significant 15° wider than regular Mayo scissors and achieved the recommended 60° in the vast majority of cases. If these findings translate into real life situations, then cutting episiotomies at 60° is expected to make a valuable contribution in reducing third- and fourth-degree tears in both spontaneous and operative vaginal deliveries. Variability in mediolateral episiotomies should be reduced by use of fixed-angle scissors or through validated health professional training programmes to improve visual accuracy.

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.

Comparison of obstetric anal sphincter injuries in nulliparous women before and after introduction of the EPISCISSORS-60(®) at two hospitals in the United Kingdom.

AIM: To assess whether the introduction of episiotomy scissors specially designed to achieve a cutting angle of 60°, EPISCISSORS-60(®), in two hospitals in the UK would result in a reduction in obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS) in nulliparous women. METHODS: A structured training program for all doctors and midwives provided a theoretical framework around OASIS including risk factors and the role of episiotomies and a practical hands-on training element to use EPISCISSORS-60(®) correctly and to measure perineal body length and post-suturing angles. Data for perineal body length, post-suturing angles, user feedback, episiotomy use, and incidence of OASIS were collected through specifically designed forms and the general hospital data collection system. RESULTS: Data were available for 838 nulliparous vaginal deliveries. Mean perineal body length was 37 mm in spontaneous vaginal delivery group (standard deviation [SD] =8.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] =34-39) and 38 mm in the operative vaginal delivery group (SD=8, 95% CI=35-40). Post-suturing episiotomy angles were 53° (SD=6.5, 95% CI=50.7-55.8) in spontaneous vaginal deliveries and 52° (SD=9.6, 95% CI=49-54) in operative vaginal deliveries. EPISCISSORS-60(®) were rated as "good" to "very good" by 84% of users. There was a 47% increase in the number of episiotomies in nulliparous spontaneous vaginal deliveries at Poole (P=0.007) and a 16.5% increase in the number of episiotomies in nulliparous operative vaginal deliveries in Hinchingbrooke (P=0.003). There was an overall 11% increase in episiotomy numbers in nulliparous vaginal deliveries (P=0.08). There was a statistically significant OASIS reduction of 84% in nulliparous spontaneous vaginal deliveries in women who received an episiotomy (P=0.003). CONCLUSION: Initial results after introduction of EPISCISSORS-60(®) show that the majority of health care professionals achieve post-suturing episiotomy angles between 40° and 60°. The results also show a significant increase in the use of episiotomies in the delivery of nulliparous women. There has been a statistically significant reduction in OASIS in nulliparous spontaneous vaginal deliveries.