Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Can major systematic reviews influence practice patterns? A case study of episiotomy trends

Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Episiotomy is one of the most commonly performed procedures among women of childbearing age in the United States. In 2005, a major systematic review conducted by Hartmann and colleagues recommended against routine use of episiotomy and was widely covered in the media. We assessed the impact of the Hartman et al. study on episiotomy trend.

Methods

Based on 100 % hospital discharge data from eight states in 2003–2008, we used interrupted time series regression models to estimate the impact of the Hartman et al. review on episiotomy rates. We used mixed-effects regression models to assess whether interhospital variation was reduced over time.

Results

After controlling for underlying trend, episiotomy rates dropped by 1.4 percentage points after Hartman et al. publication (p < 0.01 for spontaneous delivery; p < 0.1 for operative delivery). The publication has smaller effect on government hospitals as compared to private hospitals. Mixed effects models estimated negative correlation between cross-time and cross-hospital variations in episiotomy rates, indicating reduced cross-hospital variation over time.

Conclusions

Our results suggested that there has been a gradual decline in episiotomy rates over the period 2003–2008, and that synthesis of evidence showing harms from routine episiotomy had limited impact on practice patterns in the case of episiotomy. The experience of episiotomy illustrates the challenge of using comparative effectiveness and evidenced-based medicine to reduce use of unnecessary procedures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. National Center for Health Statistics (2011) Health, United States 2010: with special feature on death and dying, vol 2011/06/03. National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville

    Google Scholar 

  2. DeLee JB (1920) The prophylactic forceps operation. Trans Am Gynecol Soc 45:66–83

    Google Scholar 

  3. Sleep J, Grant A, Garcia J, Elbourne D, Spencer J, Chalmers I (1984) West Berkshire perineal management trial. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 289(6445):587–590

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Sleep J, Grant A (1987) West Berkshire perineal management trial: three year follow up. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 295(6601):749–751

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Klein MC, Gauthier RJ, Jorgensen SH, Robbins JM, Kaczorowski J, Johnson B et al (1992) Does episiotomy prevent perineal trauma and pelvic floor relaxation? Online J Curr Clin Trials (doc no. 10, 6019 words, 65 paragraphs)

  6. Argentina Episiotomy Trial Collaborative Group (1993) Routine vs selective episiotomy: a randomised controlled trial. Argentine episiotomy trial collaborative group. Lancet 342(8886–8887):1517–1518

    Google Scholar 

  7. Sartore A, De Seta F, Maso G, Pregazzi R, Grimaldi E, Guaschino S (2004) The effects of mediolateral episiotomy on pelvic floor function after vaginal delivery. Obstet Gynecol 103(4):669–673

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Oliphant SS, Jones KA, Wang L, Bunker CH, Lowder JL (2010) Trends over time with commonly performed obstetric and gynecologic inpatient procedures. Obstet Gynecol 116(4):926–931

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Srinivas SK, Epstein AJ, Nicholson S, Herrin J, Asch DA (2010) Improvements in US maternal obstetrical outcomes from 1992 to 2006. Med Care 48(5):487–493

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Frankman EA, Wang L, Bunker CH, Lowder JL (2009) Episiotomy in the United States: has anything changed? Am J Obstet Gynecol 200(5):573 e1–573 e7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hartmann K, Viswanathan M, Palmieri R, Gartlehner G, Thorp J Jr, Lohr KN (2005) Outcomes of routine episiotomy: a systematic review. JAMA 293(17):2141–2148

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Carroli G, Belizan J, Stamp G (1999) Episiotomy for vaginal birth. Birth 26(4):263

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Paintin DB (1990) Effective care in pregnancy and childbirth. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 97(11):967–973

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Callister LC, Hobbins-Garbett D (2000) Cochrane pregnancy and childbirth database: resource for evidence-based practice. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs JOGNN/NAACOG 29(2):123–128

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Stein R (2005) Procedure on women in labor adds risk; study urges halt to episiotomies. Washington Post

  16. Wall Street Journal (2005) Childbirth incision doesn’t help. Wall Street Journal, New York

    Google Scholar 

  17. Los Angeles Times (2005) Study says birth cut rarely helps. Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles

    Google Scholar 

  18. Johnson C (2005) Researchers call for end to estimated 1 million unneeded episiotomies. The Associated Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  19. CBS News (2005) Study finding that episiotomies have no benefit and could cause harmful injuries. CBS News, New York

    Google Scholar 

  20. NBC News (2005) Dr. Iffath Hoskins discusses recent research pointing to risks of episiotomy. NBC News Transcripts, New York

    Google Scholar 

  21. American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, ACOG Practice Bulletin (2006) Episiotomy. Clinical management guidelines for Obstetrician–Gynecologists. Obstet Gynecol 107(4):957–962 (number 71, April 2006)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Lappen JR, Gossett DR (2010) Changes in episiotomy practice: evidence-based medicine in action. Exp Rev Obstet Gynecol 5(3):301–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Adams AS, Zhang F, LeCates RF, Graves AJ, Ross-Degnan D, Gilden D et al (2009) Prior authorization for antidepressants in Medicaid: effects among disabled dual enrollees. Arch Intern Med 169(8):750–756

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Dorsey ER, Rabbani A, Gallagher SA, Conti RM, Alexander GC (2010) Impact of FDA black box advisory on antipsychotic medication use. Arch Intern Med 170(1):96–103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gillings D, Makuc D, Siegel E (1981) Analysis of interrupted time series mortality trends: an example to evaluate regionalized perinatal care. Am J Public Health 71(1):38–46

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Buchmueller T, Jacobson M, Wold C (2006) How far to the hospital? The effect of hospital closures on access to care. J Health Econ 25(4):740–761

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Greene WH (2008) Econometric analysis, 6th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  28. Stock JH, Watson MW (2006) Heteroskedasticity-robust standard errors for fixed effects panel data regression. NBER technical working paper series no. 0323. National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  29. StataCorp (2009) Stata statistical software: release 11. StataCorp LP, College Station

    Google Scholar 

  30. Webb DA, Culhane J (2002) Time of day variation in rates of obstetric intervention to assist in vaginal delivery. J Epidemiol Community Health 56(8):577–578

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Robinson JN, Norwitz ER, Cohen AP, Lieberman E (2000) Predictors of episiotomy use at first spontaneous vaginal delivery. Obstet Gynecol 96(2):214–218

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Martin JAHB, Ventura SJ et al (2011) Births: final data for 2009. National vital statistics reports, vol. 60, no. 1. National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville

    Google Scholar 

  33. Duffy SQ, Farley DE (1992) The protracted demise of medical technology. The case of intermittent positive pressure breathing. Med Care 30(8):718–736

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Howard DH, Kenline C, Lazarus HM, Lemaistre CF, Maziarz RT, McCarthy PL Jr et al (2011) Abandonment of high-dose chemotherapy/hematopoietic cell transplants for breast cancer following negative trial results. Health Serv Res 46(6pt1):1762–1777

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Howard DH, Shen Y (2013) Trends in PCI volume after negative results from a comparative effectiveness research trial. Health Serv Res (forthcoming)

  36. Howard D, Brophy R, Howell S (2012) Evidence of no benefit from knee surgery for osteoarthritis led to coverage changes and is linked to decline in procedures. Health Aff (Project Hope) 31(10):2242–2249

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors report no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yu-Chu Shen.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 3.

Table 3 Comparison of adult female population (18 or older) between analytical sample and national average

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shen, YC., Sim, W.C., Caughey, A.B. et al. Can major systematic reviews influence practice patterns? A case study of episiotomy trends. Arch Gynecol Obstet 288, 1285–1293 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-013-2904-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-013-2904-y

Keywords

Navigation