The use of episiotomy in a low-risk population in the Netherlands: a secondary analysis

How time influences episiotomy utilization and obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS)

OBJECTIVES

Obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS) pose significant challenges for young women following childbirth. The association between mediolateral episiotomy and OASIS remains a subject of debate and uncertainty. This study seeks to fill this gap.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was performed using electronic database of obstetrics department at a tertiary medical center. All vaginal deliveries and vacuum-assisted deliveries at term, with a singleton live fetus at cephalic presentation between 2015 and 2021, were included. A comparison of the rates of mediolateral episiotomy and OASIS was conducted between the periods 2015-2017 and 2018-2021. Subgroup analysis was carried out based on parity and the mode of delivery.

RESULTS

Overall, the study included 18,202 women. Between 2015 and 2017, episiotomy was performed in 1,272 cases (17.5 %), compared to 1,241 cases (11.4 %) between 2018 and 2021 (p<0.0001). Conversely, a significant increase in OASIS was observed, rising from 0.3 % during 2015-2017 to 0.6 % during 2018-2021 (p=0.012). Multivariable analysis unveiled two factors significantly linked to OASIS: the temporal cohort studied, indicating an increasing trend in recent years, and the utilization of epidural analgesia, which exhibited a protective effect, while episiotomy was not associated with OASIS.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate a marked decline in the utilization of episiotomy over the study period, accompanied by an increase in OASIS incidence. Nevertheless, our analysis found no statistically significant link between episiotomy use and OASIS incidence.

The prevention of perineal trauma during vaginal birth

Perineal trauma after vaginal birth is common, with approximately 9 of 10 women being affected. Second-degree perineal tears are twice as likely to occur in primiparous births, with a incidence of 40%. The incidence of obstetrical anal sphincter injury is approximately 3%, with a significantly higher rate in primiparous than in multiparous women (6% vs 2%). Obstetrical anal sphincter injury is a significant risk factor for the development of anal incontinence, with approximately 10% of women developing symptoms within a year following vaginal birth. Obstetrical anal sphincter injuries have significant medicolegal implications and contribute greatly to healthcare costs. For example, in 2013 and 2014, the economic burden of obstetrical anal sphincter injuries in the United Kingdom ranged between £3.7 million (with assisted vaginal birth) and £9.8 million (with spontaneous vaginal birth). In the United States, complications associated with trauma to the perineum incurred costs of approximately $83 million between 2007 and 2011. It is therefore crucial to focus on improvements in clinical care to reduce this risk and minimize the development of perineal trauma, particularly obstetrical anal sphincter injuries. Identification of risk factors allows modification of obstetrical practice with the aim of reducing the rate of perineal trauma and its attendant associated morbidity. Risk factors associated with second-degree perineal trauma include increased fetal birthweight, operative vaginal birth, prolonged second stage of labor, maternal birth position, and advanced maternal age. With obstetrical anal sphincter injury, risk factors include induction of labor, augmentation of labor, epidural, increased fetal birthweight, fetal malposition (occiput posterior), midline episiotomy, operative vaginal birth, Asian ethnicity, and primiparity. Obstetrical practice can be modified both antenatally and intrapartum. The evidence suggests that in the antenatal period, perineal massage can be commenced in the third trimester of pregnancy to increase muscle elasticity and allow stretching of the perineum during birth, thereby reducing the risk of tearing or need for episiotomy. With regard to the intrapartum period, there is a growing body of evidence from the United Kingdom, Norway, and Denmark suggesting that the implementation of quality improvement initiatives including the training of clinicians in manual perineal protection and mediolateral episiotomy can reduce the incidence of obstetrical anal sphincter injury. With episiotomy, the International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics recommends restrictive rather than routine use of episiotomy. This is particularly the case with unassisted vaginal births. However, there is a role for episiotomy, specifically mediolateral or lateral, with assisted vaginal births. This is specifically the case with nulliparous vacuum and forceps births, given that the use of mediolateral or lateral episiotomy has been shown to significantly reduce the incidence of obstetrical anal sphincter injury in these groups by 43% and 68%, respectively. However, the complications associated with episiotomy including perineal pain, dyspareunia, and sexual dysfunction should be acknowledged. Despite considerable research, interventions for reducing the risk of perineal trauma remain a subject of controversy. In this review article, we present the available data on the prevention of perineal trauma by describing the risk factors associated with perineal trauma and interventions that can be implemented to prevent perineal trauma, in particular obstetrical anal sphincter injury.

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.

Episiotomy in Southern Brazil: prevalence, trend, and associated factors

OBJECTIVE

To identify and analyze the prevalence, trend, and factors associated with episiotomy in Rio Grande, in the state of Rio Grande do Sul, Southern Brazil.

METHODS

A single, standardized questionnaire was applied to all pregnant women, residents in the municipality of Rio Grande, who had children in local hospitals between January 1 and December 12 of the years 2007, 2010, 2013, 2016 e 2019. Demographic and socioeconomic characteristics were investigated, as well as the assistance received during pregnancy and delivery. Chi-square test was used to compare proportions and Poisson regression with robust variance adjustment was used for multivariable analysis. Prevalence ratio (PR) was used as effect measure.

RESULTS

Among the 12,645 births that occurred in the five years, 5,714 (45.2%) were vaginal delivery. Of these mothers, 2,930 (51.3%; 95%CI: 50.0%–52.6%) underwent episiotomy. Over this period, the episiotomy rate decreased from 70.9% (68.4–73.5) in 2007 to 19.4% (17.1–21.7) in 2019. Adjusted analysis showed a high PR of episiotomy occurrence among women who were young (PR = 2.23; 95%CI: 1.89–2.63), had higher education (PR = 1.21; 95%Cl: 1.03–1.42), had a higher family income (PR = 1.25; 95%CI: 1.10–1.41), were primiparous (PR = 3.41; 95%CI: 2.95–3.95), had prenatal care in the private sector (PR = 1.25; 95%CI: 1.07–1.46), had oxytocin-induced labor (PR = 1.18; 95%CI:1.09–1.27), underwent forceps (PR = 1.32; 95%CI: 1.16–1.50), and whose newborn weighed 4,000 g or more (PR = 1.43; 95%CI: 1.14–1.80).

CONCLUSION

Although the prevalence of episiotomy fell sharply within the studied period, its occurrence is more likely among women at lower risk of birth complications.

Mediolateral/lateral episiotomy with operative vaginal delivery and the risk reduction of obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI): A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction and hypothesis

OASI complicates approximately 6% of vaginal deliveries. This risk is increased with operative vaginal deliveries (OVDs), particularly forceps. However, there is conflicting evidence supporting the use of mediolateral/lateral episiotomy (MLE/LE) with OVD. The aim of this study was to assess whether MLE/LE affects the incidence of OASI in OVD.

Methods

Electronic searches were performed in OVID Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library. Randomised and non-randomised observational studies investigating the risk of OASI in OVD with/without MLE/LE were eligible for inclusion. Pooled odds ratios (OR) were calculated using Revman 5.3. Risk of bias of was assessed using the Cochrane RoB2 and ROBINS-I tool. The quality of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

Results

A total of 703,977 patients from 31 studies were pooled for meta-analysis. MLE/LE significantly reduced the rate of OASI in OVD (OR 0.60 [95% CI 0.42–0.84]). On sub-group analysis, MLE/LE significantly reduced the rate in nulliparous ventouse (OR 0.51 [95% CI 0.42–0.84]) and forceps deliveries (OR 0.32 [95% CI 0.29–0.61]). In multiparous women, although the incidence of OASI was lower when a ventouse or forceps delivery was performed with an MLE/LE, this was not statistically significant. Heterogeneity remained significant across all studies (I² > 50). The quality of all evidence was downgraded to “very low” because of the critical risk of bias across many studies.

Conclusions

MLE/LE may reduce the incidence of OASI in OVDs, particularly in nulliparous ventouse or forceps deliveries. This information will be useful in aiding clinical decision-making and counselling in the antenatal period and during labour.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00192-022-05145-1.

Trend and Inequality in Episiotomy in Southern Brazil, 2007-2016: Evidence of Reduced Abusive Practice

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to measure the prevalence, to describe the trend over time, and to evaluate socioeconomic inequalities in the occurrence of episiotomies in 2007, 2010, 2013, and 2016 in the municipality of Rio Grande, in Southern Brazil.

METHODS

We included all women who had vaginal delivery in each of the studied years. All the information was obtained through a questionnaire applied at maternity wards within 48 h after delivery. The outcome consisted of episiotomy. A chi-square test was used to evaluate the linear trend. Absolute and relative inequalities were assessed from household income and schooling of the women through the Slope Index of Inequality and Relative Index of Inequality, respectively.

RESULTS

This study included 4,521 parturients. The episiotomy rate in the period fell from 71.0% (95%CI: 68.4-73.5) in 2007 to 40.1% (95%CI: 37.3-42.8) in 2016, and it was more frequent among women with higher income and higher schooling. We observed a reduction in the rate of episiotomy in all income and schooling levels, and this was more evident among women in the lowest socioeconomic levels. Absolute inequality declined, while relative inequality remained unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS FOR PRACTICE

Despite the significant reduction in the rate of episiotomy, its occurrence remains high. Women with higher income and education, therefore with lower risk for complications during childbirth, were the most frequently submitted to this procedure. Routine use of episiotomy must be reevaluated, especially among pregnant women with better socioeconomic status.

Understanding the perspectives and values of midwives, obstetricians and obstetric registrars regarding episiotomy: qualitative interview study

OBJECTIVES

Insight into perspectives and values of care providers on episiotomy can be a first step towards reducing variation in its use. We aimed to gain insight into these perspectives and values.

SETTING

Maternity care in the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

Midwives, obstetricians and obstetric registrars working in primary, secondary or tertiary care, purposively sampled, based on their perceived episiotomy rate and/or region of work.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Perspectives and values of care providers which were explored using semistructured in-depth interviews.

RESULTS

The following four themes were identified, using the evidence-based practice-model of Satterfield et al as a framework: 'Care providers' vision on childbirth', 'Discrepancy between restrictive perspective and daily practice', 'Clinical expertise versus literature-based practice' and 'Involvement of women in the decision'. Perspectives, values and practices regarding episiotomy were strongly influenced by care providers' underlying visions on childbirth. Although care providers often emphasised the importance of restrictive episiotomy policy, a discrepancy was found between this vision and the large number of varying indications for episiotomy. Although on one hand care providers cited evidence to support their practice, on the other hand, many based their decision-making to a larger extent on clinical experience. Although most care providers considered women's autonomy to be important, at the moment of deciding on episiotomy, the involvement of women in the decision was perceived as minimal, and real informed consent generally did not take place, neither during labour, nor prenatally. Many care providers belittled episiotomy in their language.

CONCLUSIONS

Care providers' underlying vision on episiotomy and childbirth was an important contributor to the large variations in episiotomy usage. Their clinical expertise was a more important component in decision-making on episiotomy than the literature. Women were minimally involved in the decision for performing episiotomy. More research is required to achieve consensus on indications for episiotomy.

Regional variations in childbirth interventions and their correlations with adverse outcomes, birthplace and care provider: A nationwide explorative study

BACKGROUND

Variations in childbirth interventions may indicate inappropriate use. Most variation studies are limited by the lack of adjustments for maternal characteristics and do not investigate variations in adverse outcomes. This study aims to explore regional variations in the Netherlands and their correlations with referral rates, birthplace, interventions, and adverse outcomes, adjusted for maternal characteristics.

METHODS

In this nationwide retrospective cohort study, using a national data register, intervention rates were analysed between twelve regions among single childbirths after 37 weeks' gestation in 2010-2013 (n = 614,730). These were adjusted for maternal characteristics using multivariable logistic regression. Primary outcomes were intrapartum referral, birthplace, and interventions used in midwife- and obstetrician-led care. Correlations both between primary outcomes and between adverse outcomes were calculated with Spearman's rank correlations.

FINDINGS

Intrapartum referral rates varied between 55-68% (nulliparous) and 20-32% (multiparous women), with a negative correlation with receiving midwife-led care at the onset of labour in two-thirds of the regions. Regions with higher referral rates had higher rates of severe postpartum haemorrhages. Rates of home birth varied between 6-16% (nulliparous) and 16-31% (multiparous), and was negatively correlated with episiotomy and postpartum oxytocin rates. Among midwife-led births, episiotomy rates varied between 14-42% (nulliparous) and 3-13% (multiparous) and in obstetrician-led births from 46-67% and 14-28% respectively. Rates of postpartum oxytocin varied between 59-88% (nulliparous) and 50-85% (multiparous) and artificial rupture of membranes between 43-52% and 54-61% respectively. A north-south gradient was visible with regard to birthplace, episiotomy, and oxytocin.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that attitudes towards interventions vary, independent of maternal characteristics. Care providers and policy makers need to be aware of reducing unwarranted variation in birthplace, episiotomy and the postpartum use of oxytocin. Further research is needed to identify explanations and explore ways to reduce unwarranted intervention rates.

Creating an Optimality Index - Netherlands: a validation study

BACKGROUND

At present, the maternity care system in the Netherlands is being reorganized into an integrated model of care, shifting the focus of midwives to include increasing numbers of births in hospital settings and clients with medium risk profiles. In light of these changes, it is useful for midwives to have a tool which may help them in reflecting upon care practices that promote physiological childbirth practices. The Optimality Index-US is an evidence based tool, designed to measure optimal perinatal care processes and outcomes. It has been validated for use in the United States (OI-US), United Kingdom (OI-UK) and Turkey (OI-TR). The objective of this study was to adapt the OI-US for the Dutch maternity care setting (OI-NL).

METHODS

Translation and back translation were applied to create the OI-NL. A panel of maternity care experts (n = 10) provided input for face validation items in the OI-NL. Assessment of inter-rater reliability and ease of use was also conducted. Following this, the OI-NL was used prospectively to collect data on 266 women who commenced intrapartum care under the responsibility of a midwife. Twice groups were compared, based on parity and on care-setting at birth. Mean scores between these groups, corrected for perinatal background factors were assessed for discriminant validity.

RESULTS

Face validity was established for OI-NL on the basis of expert input. Discriminant validity was confirmed by conducting multiple regressions analyses for parity (β = 6.21, P = 0.00) and for care-setting (β = 12.1, p = 0.00). Inter-rater reliability was 98%, with one item (Apgar score) sensitive to scoring differences.

CONCLUSION

OI-NL is a valid and reliable tool for use in the Dutch maternity care setting. In addition to its value for assessing evidence-based maternity care processes and outcomes, there is potential for use for learning and reflection. Against the backdrop of a changing maternity care system, and due to the specificity of its items OI-NL may be of value as a tool for detecting subtle changes indicative of escalating medicalization of childbirth in the Netherlands.

Variations in childbirth interventions in high-income countries: protocol for a multinational cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

There are growing concerns about the increase in rates of commonly used childbirth interventions. When indicated, childbirth interventions are crucial for preventing maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality, but their routine use in healthy women and children leads to avoidable maternal and neonatal harm. Establishing ideal rates of interventions can be challenging. This study aims to describe the range of variations in the use of commonly used childbirth interventions in high-income countries around the world, and in outcomes in nulliparous and multiparous women.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This multinational cross-sectional study will use data from births in 2013 with national population data or representative samples of the population of pregnant women in high-income countries. Data from women who gave birth to a single child from 37 weeks gestation onwards will be included and the results will be presented for nulliparous and multiparous women separately. Anonymised individual level data will be analysed. Primary outcomes are rates of commonly used childbirth interventions, including induction and/or augmentation of labour, intrapartum antibiotics, epidural and pharmacological pain relief, episiotomy in vaginal births, instrument-assisted birth (vacuum or forceps), caesarean section and use of oxytocin postpartum. Secondary outcomes are maternal and perinatal mortality, Apgar score below 7 at 5 min, postpartum haemorrhage and obstetric anal sphincter injury. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses will be conducted to investigate variations among countries, adjusted for maternal age, body mass index, gestational weight gain, ethnic background, socioeconomic status and infant birth weight. The overall mean rates will be considered as a reference category, weighted for the size of the study population per country.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The Medical Ethics Review Committee of VU University Medical Center Amsterdam confirmed that an official approval of this study was not required. Results will be disseminated at national and international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

Mode of birth and medical interventions among women at low risk of complications: A cross-national comparison of birth settings in England and the Netherlands

OBJECTIVES

To compare mode of birth and medical interventions between broadly equivalent birth settings in England and the Netherlands.

METHODS

Data were combined from the Birthplace study in England (from April 2008 to April 2010) and the National Perinatal Register in the Netherlands (2009). Low risk women in England planning birth at home (16,470) or in freestanding midwifery units (11,133) were compared with Dutch women with planned home births (40,468). Low risk English women with births planned in alongside midwifery units (16,418) or obstetric units (19,096) were compared with Dutch women with planned midwife-led hospital births (37,887).

RESULTS

CS rates varied across planned births settings from 6.5% to 15.5% among nulliparous and 0.6% to 5.1% among multiparous women. CS rates were higher among low risk nulliparous and multiparous English women planning obstetric unit births compared to Dutch women planning midwife-led hospital births (adjusted (adj) OR 1.89 (95% CI 1.64 to 2.18) and 3.66 (2.90 to 4.63) respectively). Instrumental vaginal birth rates varied from 10.7% to 22.5% for nulliparous and from 0.9% to 5.7% for multiparous women. Rates were lower in the English comparison groups apart from planned births in obstetric units. Transfer, augmentation and episiotomy rates were much lower in England compared to the Netherlands for all midwife-led groups. In most comparisons, epidural rates were higher among English groups.

CONCLUSIONS

When considering maternal outcomes, findings confirm advantages of giving birth in midwife-led settings for low risk women. Further research is needed into strategies to decrease rates of medical intervention in obstetric units in England and to reduce rates of avoidable transfer, episiotomy and augmentation of labour in the Netherlands.

Episiotomy: What angle do you cut to the midline?

OBJECTIVE

Although episiotomies are the commonest obstetric procedure performed the technique of performing one varies amongst obstetricians and midwives. The angle of episiotomy to the midline in particular has been shown to influence the risk of developing obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIS). In order to identify the differences in technique and to identify targets for training we undertook a practice survey of episiotomies to analyse the differences in technique between grades of obstetricians and midwives.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective practice survey of staff working on delivery suite in a tertiary referral unit with 9000 deliveries/year was conducted between 01/10/2014 to 01/03/2015. Each participant was provided with a pictoral representation of a perineum and a pair of standard episiotomy scissors and asked to perform an episiotomy as per their usual practice. The profession and grade of each participant was recorded along with information regarding the incision including the angle to the midline, length of incision and lateral starting distance from the midline. One way ANOVA (unrelated) was used to perform statistical analysis using IBM SPSS v23.

RESULTS

101 staff members participated in the practice survey including 63 midwives, 9 junior trainees, 15 senior trainees and 14 consultants. The mean angle of incision to the midline of episiotomies was 47°, 51°, 66° and 77° for midwives, junior trainees, senior trainees and consultants respectively. The mean angle of incision performed by midwives was significantly different to senior trainees (p>0.01) and consultants (p<0.01). 45% of all episiotomies undertaken by midwives were done at an angle <45° to the midline, compared to 7% by senior trainees and none by consultants.

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified clear deficiencies in the performance of episiotomies amongst obstetric trainees and midwives. Both midwives and obstetric trainees need to improve their technique if episiotomies are going to influence the incidence of OASIS and, more importantly the development of faecal incontinence. These results should be used to inform future training programmes to reduce the risks of OASIS.

The correct episiotomy: does it exist? A cross-sectional survey of four public Israeli hospitals and review of the literature

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Our objective was to assess episiotomy technique used in Israeli hospitals, to determine factors influencing incision parameters, and to review relevant up-to-date professional literature.

METHODS

Using anonymous questionnaires, a survey was conducted among obstetricians and midwives in the four public hospitals in northern Israel over a 1-year period commencing in October 2013. In addition to demographic and professional data, the accoucheurs were asked to describe the technique they usually use to perform an episiotomy (length, angle, and distance of initiation point from midperineum).

RESULTS

Overall, 84 obstetricians and 32 midwives participated in the survey. Only 37.6% reported performing a mediolateral episiotomy, while the rest described the lateral type, placing the initiation point at an average distance of 2.45 ± 0.88 cm from the fourchette. Compared with midwives, obstetricians reported performing a significantly longer episiotomy (3.53 ± 1.01 vs. 2.73 ± 0.81 cm, p = 0.0002).

CONCLUSIONS

According to our study and relevant literature review, the technique of episiotomy varies significantly between health professionals and is not uniformly congruent with international practice guidelines. In part, this is derived from unclear literature evidence and lack of consensus definition for proper technique of this procedure by the national guidelines. Thus, further higher-quality research, uniform protocols, and educational programs are needed to guide episiotomy practice.

Cutting an episiotomy at 60 degrees: how good are we?

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Episiotomy is regarded as the most common maternal obstetric surgical procedure. It is associated with a significant increase in blood loss, lower pelvic floor muscle strength, dyspareunia, and perineal pain compared with a perineal tear. We tested the hypothesis that all doctors and midwives can perform an episiotomy when prompted to, specifically cut at 60° from the midline (in a simulation model).

METHODS

Doctors and midwives attending the BMFMS Annual Meeting (2014), Croydon Perineal Trauma Course and staff at Poole General Hospital were invited to cut a paper replica of the perineum with a commonly used episiotomy incision pad. Participants were prompted to cut an episiotomy at 60° to the perineal midline with the anus as a reference point. The angles and distances were measured using protractors and rulers. A 58-62° band was deemed acceptable to account for measurement errors.

RESULTS

A total of 106 delegates participated. Only 15 % of doctors and midwives cut an episiotomy between 58 and 62°. Over one third (36 %) cut the episiotomy between 55 and 65° (inclusive). Nearly two thirds either underestimated the angle (<55°; 44 %), or overestimated the angle (>66°; 18 %). Thirty-six and 7.5 % of episiotomies were cut at <50 and >70° respectively. The origination point of the episiotomy was 5 mm away from the midline (IQR 1-8 mm).

CONCLUSIONS

This original observational study shows that doctors and midwives were poor at cutting at the prompted episiotomy angle of 60°. This highlights the need to develop structured training programmes to improve the visual accuracy of estimating angles or the use of fixed angle devices to help improve the ability to estimate the desired angle.