Episiotomy and perineal repair. An evaluation of resident education and experience.

M. McLennan, C. Melick, Stacey L Clancy, R. Artal
{"title":"Episiotomy and perineal repair. An evaluation of resident education and experience.","authors":"M. McLennan, C. Melick, Stacey L Clancy, R. Artal","doi":"10.1097/01.OGX.0000070125.67809.89","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\nTo describe current training practices and experience with episiotomy and perineal repair in obstetrics and gynecology residency programs in the United States.\n\n\nSTUDY DESIGN\nA questionnaire mailed to all directors of accredited programs in the United States for distribution to fourth-year residents in their last four months of training included 30 questions regarding formal teaching, supervision, experience and repair techniques.\n\n\nRESULTS\nA total of 297 of 1,177 (25.2%) residents, representing 47% of programs, responded. The response rates for the various program sizes were: 32.0% for < or = 12 residents, 29.5% for 13-19 residents, 24.6% for 20-24 residents and 18% for > or = 25 residents. Of the residents, 59.9% received no didactics on episiotomy repair techniques; 59.3% had no formal teaching on pelvic floor anatomy; and 27.7% of third-degree repairs were supervised by attending physicians. Of the respondents, 6.8% had repaired > 20 fourth-degree lacerations and 40.3%, > 20 third-degree lacerations. Ten percent of the graduates felt inadequately trained in perineal repair.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nThis survey of fourth-year residents from 47% of obstetric programs indicated that the majority of residents received no formal training in pelvic floor anatomy, episiotomy or perineal repair and, when engaged in such activities, had limited supervision.","PeriodicalId":192418,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of reproductive medicine","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"43","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of reproductive medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/01.OGX.0000070125.67809.89","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 43

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To describe current training practices and experience with episiotomy and perineal repair in obstetrics and gynecology residency programs in the United States. STUDY DESIGN A questionnaire mailed to all directors of accredited programs in the United States for distribution to fourth-year residents in their last four months of training included 30 questions regarding formal teaching, supervision, experience and repair techniques. RESULTS A total of 297 of 1,177 (25.2%) residents, representing 47% of programs, responded. The response rates for the various program sizes were: 32.0% for < or = 12 residents, 29.5% for 13-19 residents, 24.6% for 20-24 residents and 18% for > or = 25 residents. Of the residents, 59.9% received no didactics on episiotomy repair techniques; 59.3% had no formal teaching on pelvic floor anatomy; and 27.7% of third-degree repairs were supervised by attending physicians. Of the respondents, 6.8% had repaired > 20 fourth-degree lacerations and 40.3%, > 20 third-degree lacerations. Ten percent of the graduates felt inadequately trained in perineal repair. CONCLUSION This survey of fourth-year residents from 47% of obstetric programs indicated that the majority of residents received no formal training in pelvic floor anatomy, episiotomy or perineal repair and, when engaged in such activities, had limited supervision.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
会阴切开术及会阴修复。对住院医师教育和经验的评估。
目的描述目前在美国妇产科住院医师项目中外阴切开术和会阴修复的培训实践和经验。研究设计:一份问卷邮寄给美国所有认证项目的负责人,分发给最后四个月培训的四年级住院医师,其中包括30个关于正式教学、监督、经验和维修技术的问题。结果在1177名居民中,共有297人(25.2%)做出了回应,代表了47%的项目。不同项目规模的回复率分别为:<或= 12名居民32.0%,13-19名居民29.5%,20-24名居民24.6%,>或= 25名居民18%。59.9%的住院医师未接受会阴切开术修复技术的教学;59.3%未进行盆底解剖的正规教学;27.7%的三级修复由主治医生监督。6.8%的患者修复了> 20个四度撕裂伤,40.3%的患者修复了> 20个三度撕裂伤。百分之十的毕业生觉得在会阴修复方面训练不足。结论:对来自47%产科项目的四年级住院医师的调查表明,大多数住院医师没有接受过盆底解剖、会阴切开术或会阴修复方面的正式培训,并且在从事这些活动时,受到的监督有限。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Clinical Risk Factors Do Not Predict Shoulder Dystocia. Timing of Referral to the New England Trophoblastic Disease Center: Does Referral with Molar Pregnancy Versus Postmolar Gestational Trophoblastic Neoplasia Affect Outcomes? Quantitative Assessment of Endometrial Volume and Uterine Vascularity and Pregnancy Outcome in Frozen-Thawed Embryo Transfer Cycles. Birth Outcomes by Infertility Diagnosis Analyses of the Massachusetts Outcomes Study of Assisted Reproductive Technologies (MOSART). Blood Contaminated Amniotic Fluid and the Lamellar Body Count Fetal Lung Maturity Test.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1