Predictors and Unexplained Variability of Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injuries: A Population-Based Cross-Sectional Analysis.

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY International Urogynecology Journal Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.1007/s00192-024-05967-1
Christopher X Hong, Pamela S Fairchild, Payton C Schmidt, Jourdan E Triebwasser
{"title":"Predictors and Unexplained Variability of Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injuries: A Population-Based Cross-Sectional Analysis.","authors":"Christopher X Hong, Pamela S Fairchild, Payton C Schmidt, Jourdan E Triebwasser","doi":"10.1007/s00192-024-05967-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction and hypothesis: </strong>The objective was to determine the incidence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIs) and assess the predictive power of clinical risk factors for OASIs, both individually and collectively, using a US population-based birth registry.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a cross-sectional study using birth data from the National Vital Statistics System from 2016 to 2021. All vaginal births were included, excluding those with unspecified delivery route or perineal laceration status. Logistic regression models assessed the relationship between potential clinical predictors, determined a priori based on existing literature and inclusion in the registry data, and OASIs. The pseudo-R<sup>2</sup> (pR<sup>2</sup>), which indicates the proportion of variability in OASIs explained by the model out of 100%, was used to compare the predictive strength of different clinical factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 15,413,957 vaginal births were analyzed. The overall incidence of OASIs was 1.1%. The factors that exhibited the highest predictive capability for OASIs were vaginal parity (pR<sup>2</sup> 5.8%) and operative birth (pR<sup>2</sup> 4.8%), followed by infant weight (pR<sup>2</sup> 1.5%); all other factors had a pR<sup>2</sup> of 0.5% or lower. The final multivariable logistic regression model had a pR<sup>2</sup> of 11.8%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Vaginal parity and operative birth are among the most predictive clinical risk factors for OASIs, each accounting for approximately 5% of the variation in OASI outcomes. However, a significant portion of OASI occurrences remains unexplained by clinical risk factors alone. Future research focusing on the mechanisms of OASIs will be crucial for identifying high-risk patients and developing targeted interventions to reduce the risk of OASIs.</p>","PeriodicalId":14355,"journal":{"name":"International Urogynecology Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Urogynecology Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-024-05967-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis: The objective was to determine the incidence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIs) and assess the predictive power of clinical risk factors for OASIs, both individually and collectively, using a US population-based birth registry.

Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study using birth data from the National Vital Statistics System from 2016 to 2021. All vaginal births were included, excluding those with unspecified delivery route or perineal laceration status. Logistic regression models assessed the relationship between potential clinical predictors, determined a priori based on existing literature and inclusion in the registry data, and OASIs. The pseudo-R2 (pR2), which indicates the proportion of variability in OASIs explained by the model out of 100%, was used to compare the predictive strength of different clinical factors.

Results: A total of 15,413,957 vaginal births were analyzed. The overall incidence of OASIs was 1.1%. The factors that exhibited the highest predictive capability for OASIs were vaginal parity (pR2 5.8%) and operative birth (pR2 4.8%), followed by infant weight (pR2 1.5%); all other factors had a pR2 of 0.5% or lower. The final multivariable logistic regression model had a pR2 of 11.8%.

Conclusion: Vaginal parity and operative birth are among the most predictive clinical risk factors for OASIs, each accounting for approximately 5% of the variation in OASI outcomes. However, a significant portion of OASI occurrences remains unexplained by clinical risk factors alone. Future research focusing on the mechanisms of OASIs will be crucial for identifying high-risk patients and developing targeted interventions to reduce the risk of OASIs.

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
产科肛门括约肌损伤的预测因素和无法解释的变异性:基于人群的横断面分析。
导言和假设:目的是利用基于美国人口的出生登记,确定产科肛门括约肌损伤(OASIs)的发生率,并评估产科肛门括约肌损伤临床风险因素单独和共同的预测能力:我们利用美国国家生命统计系统(National Vital Statistics System)2016 年至 2021 年的出生数据开展了一项横断面研究。研究纳入了所有阴道分娩的婴儿,但不包括分娩途径不明或会阴裂伤的婴儿。逻辑回归模型评估了根据现有文献和登记数据先验确定的潜在临床预测因素与OASI之间的关系。伪R2(pseudo-R2)表示模型解释的OASIs变异性占100%的比例,用于比较不同临床因素的预测强度:结果:共分析了 15,413,957 例阴道分娩。OASI的总发生率为1.1%。对 OASIs 预测能力最强的因素是阴道准妈妈(pR2 5.8%)和手术分娩(pR2 4.8%),其次是婴儿体重(pR2 1.5%);所有其他因素的 pR2 均为 0.5% 或更低。最终的多变量逻辑回归模型的 pR2 为 11.8%:结论:阴道奇偶性和手术分娩是最能预测 OASI 的临床风险因素,各占 OASI 结果变化的 5% 左右。然而,OASI发生率中仍有很大一部分无法仅通过临床风险因素来解释。未来针对 OASI 发生机制的研究对于识别高风险患者和制定有针对性的干预措施以降低 OASI 风险至关重要。
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
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
22.20%
发文量
406
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Urogynecology Journal is the official journal of the International Urogynecological Association (IUGA).The International Urogynecology Journal has evolved in response to a perceived need amongst the clinicians, scientists, and researchers active in the field of urogynecology and pelvic floor disorders. Gynecologists, urologists, physiotherapists, nurses and basic scientists require regular means of communication within this field of pelvic floor dysfunction to express new ideas and research, and to review clinical practice in the diagnosis and treatment of women with disorders of the pelvic floor. This Journal has adopted the peer review process for all original contributions and will maintain high standards with regard to the research published therein. The clinical approach to urogynecology and pelvic floor disorders will be emphasized with each issue containing clinically relevant material that will be immediately applicable for clinical medicine. This publication covers all aspects of the field in an interdisciplinary fashion
期刊最新文献
Effects of Urinary Incontinence Subtypes on Quality of Life and Sexual Function among Women Seeking Weight Loss. The Association between Depression and Overactive Bladder: A Cross-Sectional Study of NHANES 2011-2018. Erroneous and Incomplete Reporting of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System. Health Inequalities in Urogynaecology. A Comparison of Pelvic Floor Muscle Exercises and Spinal Stabilization Exercises in Women with Stress Urinary Incontinence.
×
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