Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

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

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

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.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gurol-Urganci I, Cromwell D, Edozien L, Mahmood T, Adams E, Richmond D, et al. Third- and fourth-degree perineal tears among primiparous women in England between 2000 and 2012: time trends and risk factors. BJOG. 2013;120(12):1516–1525. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.12363.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tyagi V, Perera M, Guerrero K. Trends in obstetric anal sphincter injuries over 10 years. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;33(8):844–849. doi:10.3109/01443615.2013.831045.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ampt A, Ford J, Roberts C, Morris J. Trends in obstetric anal sphincter injuries and associated risk factors for vaginal singleton term births in New South Wales 2001–2009. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;53(1):9–16. doi:10.1111/ajo.12038.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Raisanen S, Vehvilainen-Julkunen K, Gissler M, Heinonen S. The increased incidence of obstetric anal sphincter rupture – an emerging trend in Finland. Prev Med. 2009;49(6):535–540. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.10.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. LaCross A, Groff M, Smaldone A. Obstetric anal sphincter injury and anal incontinence following vaginal birth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2015;60(1):37–47. doi:10.1111/jmwh.12283.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Radestad I, Olsson A, Nissen E, Rubertsson C. Tears in the vagina, perineum, sphincter ani, and rectum and first sexual intercourse after childbirth: a nationwide follow-up. Birth. 2008;35(2):98–106. doi:10.1111/j.1523-536X.2008.00222.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Roos AM, Thakar R, Sultan AH. Outcome of primary repair of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS): does the grade of tear matter? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010;36(3):368–374. doi:10.1002/uog.7512.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Edozien LC, Gurol-Urganci I, Cromwell DA, Adams EJ, Richmond DH, Mahmood TA, et al. Impact of third- and fourth-degree perineal tears at first birth on subsequent pregnancy outcomes: a cohort study. BJOG. 2014;121(13):1695–1703. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.12886.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Pirhonen J, Grenman S, Haadem K, Gudmundsson S, Lindqvist P, Siihola S, et al. Frequency of anal sphincter rupture at delivery in Sweden and Finland – result of difference in manual help to the baby’s head. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1998;77(10):974–977.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Laine K, Pirhonen T, Rolland R, Pirhonen J. Decreasing the incidence of anal sphincter tears during delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111(5):1053–7. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e31816c4402.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Laine K, Skjeldestad FE, Sandvik L, Staff AC. Incidence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries after training to protect the perineum: cohort study. BMJ Open. 2012;2(5):e001649. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001649.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. McPherson KC, Beggs AD, Sultan AH, Thakar R. Can the risk of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIs) be predicted using a risk-scoring system? BMC Res Notes. 2014;7:471. doi:10.1186/1756-0500-7-471.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Aasheim V, Nilsen A, Lukasse M, Reinar L. Perineal techniques during the second stage of labour for reducing perineal trauma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;12:CD006672. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006672.pub2.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hals E, Oian P, Pirhonen T, Gissler M, Hjelle S, Nilsen EB, et al. A multicenter interventional program to reduce the incidence of anal sphincter tears. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116(4):901–908. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181eda77a.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Räisänen S, Vehviläinen-Julkunen K, Gissler M, Heinonen S. High episiotomy rate protects from obstetric anal sphincter ruptures: a birth register-study on delivery intervention policies in Finland. Scand J Public Health. 2011;39(5):457–463. doi:10.1177/1403494811404276.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Karbanova J, Rusavy Z, Betincova L, Jansova M, Parizek A, Kalis V. Clinical evaluation of peripartum outcomes of mediolateral versus lateral episiotomy. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2014;124(1):72–76. doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2013.07.011.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. O’Mahony F, Hofmeyr GJ, Menon V. Choice of instruments for assisted vaginal delivery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;11:CD005455. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD005455.pub2.

    Google Scholar 

  18. de Vogel J, van der Leeuw-van Beek A, Gietelink D, Vujkovic M, de Leeuw JW, van Bavel J, et al. The effect of a mediolateral episiotomy during operative vaginal delivery on the risk of developing obstetrical anal sphincter injuries. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2012;206(5):4040–4045. doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2012.02.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Mayerhofer K, Bodner-Adler B, Bodner K, Rabl M, Kaider A, Wagenbichler P, et al. Traditional care of the perineum during birth. A prospective, randomized, multicenter study of 1,076 women. J Reprod Med. 2002;6(47):5.

  20. McCandlish R, Bowler U, van Asten H, Berridge G, Winter C, Sames L, et al. A randomised controlled trial of care of the perineum during second stage of normal labour. BJOG. 1998;105(12):1262–1272.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Trochez R, Waterfield M, Freeman RM. Hands on or hands off the perineum: a survey of care of the perineum in labour (HOOPS). Int Urogynecol J. 2011;22(10):1279–1285. doi:10.1007/s00192-011-1454-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Intrapartum care for healthy women and babies. Clinical guideline 190. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; 2014.

  23. East CE, Lau R, Biro MA. Midwives׳ and doctors׳ perceptions of their preparation for and practice in managing the perineum in the second stage of labour: a cross-sectional survey. Midwifery. 2015;31(1):122–131.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bulchandani S, Watts E, Sucharitha A, Yates D, Ismail KM. Manual perineal support at the time of childbirth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG. 2015;122(9):1157–1165. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.13431.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ismail K, Paschetta E, Papoutsis D, Freeman R. Perineal support and risk of obstetric anal sphincter injuries: a Delphi survey. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2015;94(2):165–174. doi:10.1111/aogs.12547.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Royal College of Midwives. Report of a survey exploring the position of midwives’ hands during the birth of the baby’s head. London: Royal College of Midwives; 2012. https://www.rcm.org.uk/sites/default/files/Perineal%20Audit%20Report%202014.pdf. Accessed 5 Oct 2016.

  27. Taithongchai A, Naidu M, Sultan A, Thakar R. Survey of current practice on perineal support among United Kingdom obstetric and gynaecology trainees. BJOG. 2015;122:55–6. doi:10.1111/1471-0528.13384.

  28. Jansova M, Kalis V, Lobovsky L, Hyncik L, Karbanova J, Rusavy Z. The role of thumb and index finger placement in manual perineal protection. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25(11):1533–1540. doi:10.1007/s00192-014-2425-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. The OASI Care Bundle Project. London: Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists; 2015. https://www.rcog.org.uk/en/guidelines-research-services/audit-quality-improvement/third--and-fourth-degree-tears-project/. Accessed 5 Oct 2016.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Katriina Laine and Wenche Rotvold for providing hands-on training on manual perineal protection.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Croydon University Hospital, 530 London Road, Croydon, CR7 7YE, UK

    Madhu Naidu, Abdul H. Sultan & Ranee Thakar

Authors
  1. Madhu Naidu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Abdul H. Sultan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ranee Thakar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ranee Thakar.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

None.

Funding

We thank the Research and Development Committee of Croydon (previously Mayday) Health Services for providing a grant to fund the training intervention programme.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Naidu, M., Sultan, A.H. & Thakar, R. Reducing obstetric anal sphincter injuries using perineal support: our preliminary experience. Int Urogynecol J 28, 381–389 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3176-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-016-3176-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation