Advertisement

The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India

, Volume 64, Issue 6, pp 425–429 | Cite as

A Comparison of the “Hands-Off” and “Hands-On” Methods to Reduce Perineal Lacerations: A Randomised Clinical Trial

  • Rozita Rezaei
  • Sussan SaatsazEmail author
  • Yiong Huak Chan
  • Hamid Sharif Nia
Original Article

Abstract

Objective

The objective of the current study was to compare the “Hands-off” and “Hands-on” methods to reduce perineal lacerations.

Method

We conducted a randomized controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of two techniques for perineum protection during spontaneous delivery. Study participants included 600 nulliparous expectant mothers, who were divided equally between the “hands off” and “hands on” groups (n_300 per group).

Findings

A total of 147 (49 %) women in the “Hands-on” and 143 women (47.7 %) in the “Hand -off” groups encountered perineal trauma (p = 0.74). In the “Hands-on” group, 8 women (2.7 %) experienced a third degree trauma compared with (0.3 %) that in the “Hands-off” method (p = 0.1).

Episiotomy was performed on 38 women (12.7 %) from the “Hands-on” and 17 (5.7 %) women from the “Hands-off” (p = 0.003) groups. In addition, 28 women (9.3 %) from the “Hands-on” group and 47 women (15.7 %) from the “Hands-off” group experienced periurethral tears (p = 0.01) that did not need mending.

Conclusion

Application of the “Hands-off” method for vaginal delivery has a positive effect on the mother’s health because of the reduction of Episiotomy and third degree tearing. Therefore, we conclude that the “Hands-off” method offers a safer alternative for perineal control during labor.

Keywords

Hands-on Hand off Perineal lacerations 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank all the women and midwives who took part in this study and helped us; we would also like to express our gratitude to the head of Imam Ali hospital and the authority of the delivery department. This study was funded by Mazandaran university of medical sciences, Sari, Iran

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest

References

  1. 1.
    Berghella V, Baxter JK, Chauhan SP. Evidence-based labor and delivery management. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2008;199(5):445–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sohrabi M, Ivan BR, SHirinkam R, et al. A comparison of” Hands Off versus” Hands On”(Ritgen) techniques on perineal trauma during birth in nulliparous women. J Ardabil Univ Med Sci(JAUMS). 2009.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    McCandlish R. Perineal trauma: prevention and treatment. J Midwifery Women’s Health. 2001;46(6):396–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Albers LL, Sedler KD, Bedrick EJ, et al. Factors related to genital tract trauma in normal spontaneous vaginal births. Birth. 2006;33(2):94–100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Records K, Wilson BL. Reflections on meeting women’s childbirth expectations. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2011;40(4):394–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jahdi F, Kashanian M, Ashghali Farahani M, et al. The effect of hands-off and hands-on methods on perineal status. J Sabzevar Sch Med Sci. 2010;16(4):189–195.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mathai MSH, Guidotti RJ. World Health Organization managing complications in pregnancy and childbirth: a guide for midwive and doctors recommendations for preventing and treating perineal injury at vaginal delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;107(2):361–6.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Heit M, Mudd K, Culligan P. Prevention of childbirth injuries to the pelvic floor. Curr Women’s Health Rep. 2001;1:72–80.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    de Souza Caroci da Costa A, Gonzalez Riesco ML. A comparison of “Hands Off” versus “Hands On” techniques for decreasing perineal lacerations during birth. J Midwifery Women’s Health. 2006;51(2):106–111.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Albers LL, Borders N. Minimizing genital tract trauma and related pain following spontaneous vaginal birth. J Midwifery Women’s Health. 2007;52(3):246–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    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(6):477–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Foroughipour A, Firuzeh F, Ghahiri A, et al. The effect of perineal control with hands-on and hand-poised methods on perineal trauma and delivery outcome. J Res Med Sci. 2011;16(8):1040–6.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Aasheim V, Nilsen ABV, Lukasse M, et al. Perineal techniques during the second stage of labour for reducing perineal trauma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;12. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006672.pub2.
  14. 14.
    Laine K, Pirhonen T, Rolland R, et al. Decreasing the incidence of anal sphincter tears during delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111(5):1053.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Greve T. Disturbing” New” trends in tear prevention threaten midwives’ autonomy. Midwifery Today IntMidwife. 2009;35(92):56.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Federation of Obstetric & Gynecological Societies of India 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rozita Rezaei
    • 1
  • Sussan Saatsaz
    • 1
    Email author
  • Yiong Huak Chan
    • 2
  • Hamid Sharif Nia
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery of AmolMazandaran University of Medical SciencesSariIran
  2. 2.Biostatistics Unit, Yong Loo Lin School of MedicineNational University Health SystemSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations