Episiotomy: an informed consent proposal

Level of episiotomy practice and its disparity among primiparous and multiparous women in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Episiotomy at the time of vaginal birth is a common lifesaving surgical procedure. In Ethiopia, several studies have been conducted concerning the proportion of episiotomy. However, its prevalence varies across these series of studies. Thus, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the level of episiotomy practice and its disparity among primiparous and multiparous women in Ethiopia.

Methods

This systematic review was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guideline. We systematically searched the PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Science Direct databases for studies conducted in Ethiopia focusing on episiotomy. We included all cross-sectional studies published until October 5,2022. Data were analyzed using R version 4.2.1 software. The pooled estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were presented using forest plots. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted on extracted crude rates to calculate the national and regional pooled estimates for the country. The I-squared test and Egger's regression test were used to assess heterogeneity and publication bias, respectively.

Results

Our search yielded 390 articles. A total of 13 studies covering five administrative regions and 6,404 women who delivered vaginally were involved. The mean age of the study participants ranged from 22 to 27.7 years. The estimated overall pooled prevalence rate of episiotomy in Ethiopian women was 42.75% (95% CI: 34.97%-50.54%). In the subgroup analysis, the pooled prevalence rate of episiotomy was 61.45% (95% CI: 51.11%-71.80%) among primiparous women. Meanwhile, the pooled estimate appears to be approximately 30.47% (95% CI: 22.08%-38.85%) among multiparous women.

Conclusion

Our findings concluded that the pooled prevalence rate of episiotomy was higher than the evidence-based WHO recommendations for optimal patient care. Parallel to this, nulliparous women had a higher episiotomy rate than multiparous women. These findings highlight the importance of continued training for labor ward staff, particularly healthcare providers who often perform the majority of deliveries.

Episiotomy Skills Self-Efficacy Scale (ESSES): Development and psychometric properties

BACKGROUND

Episiotomy is a surgical procedure that increases midwifery students' anxiety levels and reduces their self-efficacy levels. However, there is no valid and reliable tool to assess the student's episiotomy experience-related self-efficacy levels.

OBJECTIVES

The study was aimed at developing the Episiotomy Skills Self-Efficacy Scale and investigating its psychometric properties.

DESIGN

In the study, the descriptive, cross-sectional and methodological design was used.

SETTING

The study was conducted at the midwifery department of a state university in western Turkey.

PARTICIPANTS

The study sample included 209 midwifery students selected using the convenience sampling method.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review and expert panel was conducted on episiotomy skills. Content validity was performed by 10 health professionals. Of them, one was an obstetrician and gynecologist, four were midwives and five were faculty members working in midwifery departments of different universities. The Episiotomy Skills Self-Efficacy Scale was administered to the 3rd and 4th grade students who had taken a course on childbirth. The inclusion criteria were as follows: having received episiotomy training, and having opened and closed an episiotomy on a model in the laboratory. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis was performed within the scope of validity. Reliability was evaluated with the Cronbach's alpha method and item-total correlations.

RESULTS

A two-factor structure which explained 77.96 % of the total variance was obtained by factor analysis. Its "Preparation for and Implementation of Episiotomy" dimension includes 11 items, and "Episiotomy Repair and Control" dimension includes 8 items. Model fit indices were at an acceptable level. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the scale was 0.97.

CONCLUSIONS

The Episiotomy Skills Self-Efficacy Scale has sufficient psychometric validity and reliability. It is short and easily administered.

Episiotomy Practice and Its Associated Factors in Africa: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Episiotomy, a surgical procedure that enlarges the vaginal opening during childbirth, was common practice until the early 2000s. Other sources, including the World Health Organization (WHO), advocate for the selective use of episiotomy. Episiotomy rates, on the other hand, have remained high in developing countries, while declining in developed countries. As a result, the current study sought to determine the overall prevalence of episiotomy in Africa as well as the risk factors associated with its practice.

Methods

Articles were searched in international electronic databases. A standardized Microsoft Excel spreadsheet and STATA software version 14 were used for data extraction and analysis, respectively. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) checklist was used to write this report. A random-effects meta-analysis model was used to determine the pooled prevalence of episiotomy. A heterogeneity test was conducted using I-Squared (I²) statistics. Egger's test and funnel plots were conducted to detect publication bias. Subgroup analysis was also conducted. Association was expressed through a pooled odds ratio (OR) with a 95% Confidence Interval (CI).

Result

A total of 21 studies with 40,831 participants were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of episiotomy practice was 41.7% [95% CI (36.0–47.4), I² = 99.3%, P < 0.001). Primiparity [OR: 6.796 (95% CI (4.862–9.498)), P < 0.001, I²: 95.1%], medical doctors- assisted delivery [OR: 3.675 (95% CI (2.034–6.640)), P < 0.001, I²: 72.6%], prolonged second stage of labor [OR: 5.539 (95% CI (4.252–7.199)), P < 0.001, I²: 0.0%], using oxytocin [OR: 4.207 (95% CI (3.100–5.709)), P < 0.001, I²: 0.0%], instrument -assisted vaginal delivery [OR: 5.578 (95% CI (4.285–7.260)), P < 0.001, I²: 65.1%], and macrosomia [OR: 5.32 (95% CI (2.738–10.339)), P < 0.001, I²: 95.1%] were factors associated with episiotomy practice.

Conclusion

In this review, the prevalence of episiotomy among African parturients was high. A selective episiotomy practice should be implemented to reduce the high episiotomy rates.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021293382, identifier: CRD42021293382.

Quality of Informed Consent Practices around the Time of Childbirth: A Cross-Sectional Study in Italy

BACKGROUND

Few studies have explored consent request practices during childbirth.

OBJECTIVE

We explored consent request practices during childbirth in a referral hospital and research centre in Italy, capturing both women and health workers' perspectives.

METHODS

Data were collected using self-administrated questionnaires between December 2016 and September 2018. Nine key maternal and newborn procedures were analysed. Associations between consent requests and women characteristics were explored by multiple logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 1244 women, the rate of consent requests varied widely, with caesarean section (CS) showing the highest rate (89.1%) and neonatal conjunctivitis prophylaxis presenting the lowest rate (11.4%). Information provided on "risks/benefits" and "reasons" for procedures by health staff was most often not comprehensive for procedures of interest (range 18.6-87.4%). The lack of informed consent is not specifically linked to any pattern of women characteristics. According to 105 health workers, adequate protocols and standard forms for consent requests were available in 67.6% and 78.1% of cases, respectively, while less than one third (31.4%) reported having received adequate training and supportive supervision on how to deliver informed consent.

CONCLUSIONS

Study findings align with previous evidence showing that consent request practices during childbirth need to be largely improved. More research is needed to investigate effective strategies for improvement.

Choice in episiotomy - fact or fantasy: a qualitative study of women's experiences of the consent process

Background

Consent to episiotomy is subject to the same legal and professional requirements as consent to other interventions, yet is often neglected. This study explores how women experience and perceive the consent process.

Methods

Qualitative research in a large urban teaching hospital in London. Fifteen women who had recently undergone episiotomy were interviewed using a semi-structured interview guide and data was analysed using thematic analysis.

Results

Three themes captured women’s experiences of the episiotomy consent process: 1) Missing information – “We knew what it was, so they didn’t give us details,” 2) Lived experience of contemporaneous, competing events – “There’s no time to think about it,” and 3) Compromised volitional consent – “You have no other option.” Minimal information on episiotomy was shared with participants, particularly concerning risks and alternatives. Practical realities such as time pressure, women’s physical exhaustion and their focus on the baby’s safe delivery, constrained consent discussions. Participants consequently inferred that there was no choice but episiotomy; whilst some women were still happy to agree, others perceived the choice to be illusory and disempowering, and subsequently experienced episiotomy as a distressing event.

Conclusions

Consent to episiotomy is not consistently informed and voluntary and more often takes the form of compliance. Information must be provided to women in a more timely fashion in order to fulfil legal requirements, and to facilitate a sense of genuine choice.

Women's experiences of receiving information about and consenting or declining to participate in a randomized controlled trial involving episiotomy in vacuum-assisted delivery: a qualitative study

Background

Information about and invitation to participate in a clinical trial involving an intervention during childbirth may cause fear or worry in pregnant women. The aim of this study was to describe nulliparous women’s experiences of receiving an invitation to participate in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of lateral episiotomy versus no episiotomy in vacuum-assisted delivery (EVA trial).

Methods

This qualitative study was nested in the ongoing EVA trial. Data were collected through semistructured telephone interviews with 23 women regarding their experiences of the information and invitation to participate in the EVA trial. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. A qualitative content analysis was used to analyse the interview contents.

Results

Three main experience categories were identified among the participants. “Timing of trial information and understanding” revealed that women preferred to obtain information about the trial early on during pregnancy. “Reasons to consent to or decline participation in the trial” encompassed a variety of reasons for women to consent, such as goodwill for science or personal benefits, or to decline, such as not wanting to be randomized or fear of increased risk of having a vacuum-assisted delivery. “Thoughts evoked regarding childbirth” were diverse, ranging from not being affected at all to having increased anxiety.

Conclusions

The women’s experience of receiving an invitation to participate in an RCT of episiotomy in vacuum-assisted delivery varied widely, from immediately giving consent without further worries to increased anxiety or declining participation. Early and personal information with time for reflection was considered most satisfactory.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.govNCT02643108. Registered on December 28, 2015. The Lateral Episiotomy or Not in Vacuum Assisted Delivery in Non-parous Women (EVA) trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov.