Variations in rates of severe perineal tears and episiotomies in 20 European countries: a study based on routine national data in Euro‐Peristat Project
Authors:
- Béatrice BlondelBBBéatrice Blondel
- Ragnheiður I. BjarnadóttirRBRagnheiður I. Bjarnadóttir
- Mika GisslerMGMika Gissler
- Wei‐Hong ZhangWZWei‐Hong Zhang
- Ashna D. Hindori‐MohangooAHAshna D. Hindori‐Mohangoo
- Jennifer ZeitlinJZJennifer Zeitlin
- the Euro‐Peristat Scientific CommitteeTCthe Euro‐Peristat Scientific Committee
- 5 April 2016
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica
- Vol. 95 (7) , 746-754
Abstract
Introduction: Rates of severe perineal tears and episiotomies are indicators of obstetrical quality of care, but their use for international comparisons is complicated by difficulties with accurate ascertainment of tears and uncertainties regarding the optimal rate of episiotomies. We compared rates of severe perineal tears and episiotomies in European countries and analysed the association between these two indicators.Material and methods: We used aggregate data from national routine statistics available in the Euro‐Peristat project. We compared rates of severe (third‐ and fourth‐degree) tears and episiotomies in 2010 by mode of vaginal delivery (n = 20 countries), and investigated time trends between 2004 and 2010 (n = 9 countries). Statistical associations were assessed with Spearman's ranked correlations (rho).Results: In 2010 in all vaginal deliveries, rates of severe tears ranged from 0.1% in Romania to 4.9% in Iceland, and rates of episiotomies from 3.7% in Denmark to 75.0% in Cyprus. A negative correlation between the rates of episiotomies and severe tears was observed in all deliveries (rho = −0.66; p = 0.001), instrumental deliveries (rho = −0.67; p = 0.002) and non‐instrumental deliveries (rho = −0.72; p < 0.001). However there was no relation between time trends of these two indicators (rho = 0.43; p = 0.28).Conclusions: The large variations in severe tears and episiotomies and the negative association between these indicators in 2010 show the importance of improving the assessment and reporting of tears in each country, and evaluating the impact of low episiotomy rates on the perineum.Keywords
Funding Information
- European Union (20101301, 2007114, 2003131, 664691)
This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit:
- Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury and Anal Incontinence Following Vaginal Birth: A Systematic Review and Meta‐AnalysisJournal of Midwifery & Women's Health, 2015
- Selective episiotomy vs. implementation of a non episiotomy protocol: a randomized clinical trialReproductive Health, 2014
- Third‐ and fourth‐degree perineal tears among primiparous women in England between 2000 and 2012: time trends and risk factorsBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 2013
- The rate of obstetric anal sphincter injuries in Finnish obstetric units as a patient safety indicatorEuropean Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 2013
- Long‐term outcome after obstetric injury: a retrospective studyActa Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 2012
- Episiotomy characteristics and risks for obstetric anal sphincter injuries: a case‐control studyBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 2012
- Trends in Risk Factors for Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injuries in NorwayObstetrics & Gynecology, 2010
- A randomised controlled trial of routine versus restrictive use of episiotomy at operative vaginal delivery: a multicentre pilot studyBJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 2008
- A Behavioral Intervention to Improve Obstetrical CareNew England Journal of Medicine, 2008
- Outcomes of Routine EpisiotomyJAMA, 2005