ASSESSMENT OF IMMEDIATE PERINEAL COMPLICATIONS OF NORMAL VAGINAL DELIVERY VERSUS VAGINAL DELIVERY WITH EPISIOTOMY IN TERM PREGNANCY IN A TERTIARY CARE HOSPITAL
{"title":"ASSESSMENT OF IMMEDIATE PERINEAL COMPLICATIONS OF NORMAL VAGINAL DELIVERY VERSUS VAGINAL DELIVERY WITH EPISIOTOMY IN TERM PREGNANCY IN A TERTIARY CARE HOSPITAL","authors":"Samdana Wahab","doi":"10.52764/jms.23.31.1.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: To assess immediate intra and postpartum perineal complications following normal vaginal delivery versus vaginal delivery with episiotomy in term pregnancy.\nMaterial and methods: This Cross-sectional study, was conducted in Peshawar, Lady Reading Hospital, Gynae ward from 1st November 2019 to 31st January 2020 after approval from Institutional Research Board. A total of 250 patients (125 in each group), 120 in group A with normal vaginal delivery, 115 in group B (vaginal delivery with an episiotomy), and 15 patients were excluded due to different modes of delivery (instrumental delivery/cesarean section). All patients with full-term pregnancies were included. Patients who refused to give consent or had bleeding disorders and indications for instrumental delivery or cesarean section were excluded. Non-probable convenience sampling technique, P-value <0.05, 95% confidence interval, and Chi-square test used for statistical analysis\nResults: In the group, A mean age of 22 years, primigravida (PG) 84 (70%) multigravida (MG) 36 (30%) mean period of gestation (POG) 38 weeks, 96(80%) spontaneous, 24 (20%) induced labor. In group B the mean age was 21.8 years, PG 77 (66%), MG 38(33%), mean POG 41 weeks, 97 (84%) spontaneous, and 18 (15%) induced labor. Group A vaginal tears 6 (5%), cervical tears 4 (3%), mixed tears 9 (7.5%), para-urethral tears 2 (1.6%), and perineal tears 9(7.5%). Group B vaginal tears 3 (2.6%), cervical tears 3 (2.6%), mixed tears 2 (1.7%). No significant post-natal pain difference was observed in the groups.\nCONCLUSION: Routine practice of episiotomy should be discouraged as no significant difference was observed in both groups.\nKEYWORDS: Episiotomy, Term pregnancy, Vaginal delivery.","PeriodicalId":39900,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Sciences (Taiwan)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Sciences (Taiwan)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52764/jms.23.31.1.6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: To assess immediate intra and postpartum perineal complications following normal vaginal delivery versus vaginal delivery with episiotomy in term pregnancy.
Material and methods: This Cross-sectional study, was conducted in Peshawar, Lady Reading Hospital, Gynae ward from 1st November 2019 to 31st January 2020 after approval from Institutional Research Board. A total of 250 patients (125 in each group), 120 in group A with normal vaginal delivery, 115 in group B (vaginal delivery with an episiotomy), and 15 patients were excluded due to different modes of delivery (instrumental delivery/cesarean section). All patients with full-term pregnancies were included. Patients who refused to give consent or had bleeding disorders and indications for instrumental delivery or cesarean section were excluded. Non-probable convenience sampling technique, P-value <0.05, 95% confidence interval, and Chi-square test used for statistical analysis
Results: In the group, A mean age of 22 years, primigravida (PG) 84 (70%) multigravida (MG) 36 (30%) mean period of gestation (POG) 38 weeks, 96(80%) spontaneous, 24 (20%) induced labor. In group B the mean age was 21.8 years, PG 77 (66%), MG 38(33%), mean POG 41 weeks, 97 (84%) spontaneous, and 18 (15%) induced labor. Group A vaginal tears 6 (5%), cervical tears 4 (3%), mixed tears 9 (7.5%), para-urethral tears 2 (1.6%), and perineal tears 9(7.5%). Group B vaginal tears 3 (2.6%), cervical tears 3 (2.6%), mixed tears 2 (1.7%). No significant post-natal pain difference was observed in the groups.
CONCLUSION: Routine practice of episiotomy should be discouraged as no significant difference was observed in both groups.
KEYWORDS: Episiotomy, Term pregnancy, Vaginal delivery.