Top

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Care | Research article

Health care workers’ perceptions of episiotomy in the era of respectful maternity care: a qualitative study of an obstetric training program in Mexico

Authors: Rodrigo Garcia-Cerde, Pilar Torres-Pereda, Marisela Olvera-Garcia, Jennifer Hulme

Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth | Issue 1/2021

Abstract

Background

Episiotomy in Mexico is highly prevalent and often routine - performed in up to 95% of births to primiparous women. The WHO suggests that episiotomy be used in selective cases, with an expected prevalence of 15%. Training programs to date have been unsuccessful in changing this practice. This research aims to understand how and why this practice persists despite shifts in knowledge and attitudes facilitated by the implementation of an obstetric training program.

Methods

This is a descriptive and interpretative qualitative study. We conducted 53 pre and post-intervention (PRONTO© Program) semi-structured interviews with general physician, gynecologists and nurses (N = 32, 56% women). Thematic analysis was carried out using Atlas-ti© software to iteratively organize codes. Through interpretive triangulation, the team found theoretical saturation and explanatory depth on key analytical categories.

Results

Themes fell into five major themes surrounding their perceptions of episiotomy: as a preventive measure, as a procedure that resolves problems in the moment, as a practice that gives the clinician control, as a risky practice, and the role of social norms in practicing it. Results show contradictory discourses among professionals. Despite the growing support for the selective use of episiotomy, it remains positively perceived as an effective prophylaxis for the complications of childbirth while maintaining control in the hands of health care providers.

Conclusions

Perceptions of episiotomy shed light on how and why routine episiotomy persists, and provides insight into the multi-faceted approaches that will be required to affect this harmful obstetrical practice.

Campos Castolo EM, Villanueva Egan LA, González García I, Ramírez Hernández C, Flores Romero G. Recomendaciones generales Para mejorar la calidad en la atención obstétrica. Ciudad de México; 2012. Available from: http://www.conamed.gob.mx/prof_salud/pdf/recom_obstetricia_web.pdf. Accessed 9 Aug 2021.

Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía. Encuesta Nacional de la Dinámica Demográfica ENADID 2014. 2014 [cited 2019 Nov 11]. Available from: https://www.inegi.org.mx/programas/enadid/2014/

Centro Nacional de Equidad De Género y Salud Reproductiva. Estrategia Integral para Acelerar la Reducción de la Mortalidad Materna en México. Ciudad de México; 2009. Available from: http://www.coneval.gob.mx/rw/resource/coneval/info_public/Estrategia_Integral.pdf. Accessed 9 Aug 2021.

Sánchez Bringas A, Pérez BG. ¿Qué sabemos de la morbilidad materna en México? Género y Salud en cifras. 2014;12(1):3–14.

Esparza-Valencia DM, Toro-Ortiz JC, Herrera-Ortega O, Fernández-Lara JA. Prevalence of extreme maternal morbidity in a second-level hospital in San Luis potosí, méxico. Ginecol Obstet Mex. 2018;86(5):304–12.

Austin A, Langer A, Salam RA, Lassi ZS, Das JK, Bhutta ZA. Approaches to improve the quality of maternal and newborn health care: an overview of the evidence. Reprod Health. 2014;11(Suppl 2):1–9.CrossRef

Miller S, Abalos E, Chamillard M, Ciapponi A, Colaci D, Comandé D, et al. Beyond too little, too late and too much, too soon: a pathway towards evidence-based, respectful maternity care worldwide. Lancet. 2016;388(10056):2176–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31472-6.CrossRefPubMed

World Health Organization. Care in normal birth: a practical guide. Birth. 1997;24(2):121–3. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-536X.1997.tb00352.x.CrossRef

SEA-ORCHID Study Group. Use of evidence-based practices in pregnancy and childbirth: South East Asia Optimising Reproductive and Child Health in Developing Countries project. PLoS One. 2008;3(7):e2646.CrossRef

10.

Thorp JMJ, Bowes WAJ. Episiotomy: can its routine use be defended? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1989;160(5 Pt 1):1027–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9378(89)90152-X.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Sánchez Casal MI. Episiotomía versus desgarro. Revisión de las evidencias científicas. Enfermería Docente. 2012;97:27–32 Available from: http://www.sspa.juntadeandalucia.es/servicioandaluzdesalud/huvvsites/default/files/revistas/ED-97-09.pdf.

12.

Banta D, Thacker SB. The risks and benefits of episiotomy: a review. Birth. 1982;9(1):25–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-536X.1982.tb01599.x.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Morano S, Mistrangelo E, Pastorino D, Lijoi D, Costantini S, Ragni N. A randomized comparison of suturing techniques for episiotomy and laceration repair after spontaneous vaginal birth. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2006;13(5):457–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2006.06.006.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Comisión Ejecutiva de Atención a Víctimas. Diagnóstico sobre victimización a causa de violencia obstétrica en México. Ciudad de México; 2017. Available from: https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/194701/Diagno_stico_VO_port.pdf. Accessed 9 Aug 2021.

15.

Castro R, Erviti J. 25 Anos De Investigacion Sobre Violencia Obstetrica En Mexico. Conamed. 2014;19(1):37–42.

16.

Ballesteros-Meseguer C, Carrillo-García C, Meseguer-de-Pedro M, Canteras-Jordana M, Martínez-Roche ME. Episiotomy and its relationship to various clinical variables that influence its performance. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem. 2016;24:e2793 2016/05/20. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27224064.CrossRef

17.

Frankman EA, Wang L, Bunker CH, Lowder JL. Episiotomy in the United States: has anything changed? Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;200(5):573.e1–7.CrossRef

18.

Jiang H, Qian X, Carroli G, Garner P. Selective versus routine use of episiotomy for vaginal birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;2. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD000081.pub3

19.

Hartmann K, Viswanathan M, Palmieri R, Gartlehner G, Thorp JJ, Lohr KN. Outcomes of routine episiotomy: a systematic review. JAMA. 2005;293(17):2141–8. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.293.17.2141.CrossRefPubMed

20.

World Health Organization. WHO Recommendations: intrapartum care for a positive childbirth experience. Geneva; 2018. Available from: https://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/intrapartumcare-guidelines/en/. Accessed 9 Aug 2021.

21.

Cunha C, Katz L, Lemos A, Amorim M. Knowledge, attitude and practice of Brazilian obstetricians regarding episiotomy. RBGO Gynecol Obstet. 2019;41:636–46.

22.

Diario Oficial de la Federación. NOM-007-SSA2–2016: Norma Oficial Mexicana para la atención de la mujer durante el embarazo, parto y puerperio, y de la persona recién nacida. Secretaría de Gobernación (SEGOB). Ciudad de México; 2016.

23.

IMSS. Guía de Práctica Clínica para la Vigilancia y Manejo del Trabajo Parto en embarazo de Bajo Riesgo. In: Catálogo Maestro de Guías de Práctica Clínica: IMSS-052-08. Ciudad de México; 2014.

24.

Secretaría de Salud. La calidad de la atención a la salud en México a través de sus instituciones. Ciudad de México; 2015.

25.

Walker DM, Cohen SR, Estrada F, Monterroso ME, Jenny A, Fritz J, et al. PRONTO training for obstetric and neonatal emergencies in Mexico. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2012;116(2):128–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgo.2011.09.021.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Walker DM, Cohen SR, Fritz J, Olvera-Garcia M, Zelek ST, Fahey JO, et al. Impact evaluation of PRONTO Mexico: A simulation-based program in obstetric and neonatal emergencies and team training. Simul Healthc 2016;11(1):1–9, 1, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/SIH.0000000000000106.

27.

Fritz J, Lamadrid-Figueroa H, Angeles G, Montoya A, Walker D. Health providers pass knowledge and abilities acquired by training in obstetric emergencies to their peers: the average treatment on the treated effect of PRONTO on delivery attendance in Mexico. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018;18(1):232. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-018-1872-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

28.

Fritz J, Walker DM, Cohen S, Angeles G, Lamadrid-Figueroa H. Can a simulation-based training program impact the use of evidence based routine practices at birth? Results of a hospital-based cluster randomized trial in Mexico. PLoS One. 2017;12(3):e0172623. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0172623.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Badran IG. Knowledge, attitude and practice the three pillars of excellence and wisdom: a place in the medical profession. EMHJ. 1995;1:8–16 Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/116905/emhj_1995_1_1_8_16.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.

30.

Minkler M, Wallerstein NB. Improving Health Through Community Organization and Community Building. In: Glanz K, Rimer BK, Lewis FM, editors. Health Behavior and Health Education Theory, Research, and Practice. 3rd ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2002. p. 279–311.

31.

Teddlie C, Yu F. Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples. J Mix Methods Res. 2007;1(1):77–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689806292430.CrossRef

32.

Meadows L, Morse J. Constructing evidence within the qualitative project. In: Morse J, Swanson J, Kuzel A, editors. The nature of evidence in qualitative inquiry. CA: Sage; 2001. p. 187–202. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412986236.n8.CrossRef

33.

Federay J, Muir-Cochrane E. Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. Int J Qual Methods. 2006;5(1) Available from: http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/5_1/pdf/fereday.pdf. Accessed 9 Aug 2021.

34.

Strauss A, Corbin J. Bases de la investigación cualitativa. Técnicas y procedimientos para desarrollar la teoría fundamentada. Medellín: Contus; 2002.

35.

Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today. 2004;24(2):105–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Atlas-ti ©. Qualitative data analysis software. Version 7.5.4. 2012.

37.

Diniz SG. Que valores escolhemos nesse ritual? Rev Estud Fem. 2002;10(2):523–7. Available from: http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0104-026X2002000200023&lng=pt&tlng=pt. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-026X2002000200023.CrossRef

38.

Walzer Leavrir J. Joseph B. DeLee and the practice of preventive obstetrics. Am J Public Health 1988;78(10):1353–1361. Available from: https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.78.10.1353

39.

Goueslard K, Cottenet J, Roussot A, Clesse C, Sagot P, Quantin C. How did episiotomy rates change from 2007 to 2014? Population-based study in France. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018;18(1):208 Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29866103.CrossRef

40.

Schantz C, Sim KL, Ly EM, Barennes H, Sudaroth S, Goyet S. Reasons for routine episiotomy: A mixed-methods study in a large maternity hospital in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Reprod Health Matters 2015;23(45):68–77. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rhm.2015.06.012.

41.

Goldberg J, Hyslop T, Tolosa JE, Sultana C. Racial differences in severe perineal lacerations after vaginal delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003;188(4):1063–7. https://doi.org/10.1067/mob.2003.251.CrossRefPubMed

42.

Klein MC. Studying episiotomy: when beliefs conflict with science. J Fam Pract. 1995;41(5):483–8 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7595267.PubMed

43.

Seijmonsbergen-Schermers A, Thompson S, Feijen-de Jong E, Smit M, Prins M, van den Akker T, et al. Understanding the perspectives and values of midwives, obstetricians and obstetric registrars regarding episiotomy: qualitative interview study. BMJ Open 2021;11(1):e037536. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037536

44.

Klein MC, Kaczorowski J, Robbins JM, Gauthier RJ, Jorgensen SH, Joshi AK. Physicians’ beliefs and behaviour during a randomized controlled trial of episiotomy: consequences for women in their care. CMAJ. 1995;153(6):769–79.PubMedPubMedCentral

45.

Klein MC, Gauthier RJ, Jorgensen SH, Robbins JM, Kaczorowski J, Johnson B, et al. Does episiotomy prevent perineal trauma and pelvic floor relaxation? Jordemodern. 1993;106(10):375–7 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8276683.PubMed

46.

Sagi-Dain L, Sagi S. Episiotomy knowledge, attitudes and practice: a cross- sectional survey of four public Israeli hospitals and review of the literature. Evid Based Midwifery. 2015;13:138–42 Available from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b00f/f9e1f5524ec5bb9254e7177f3478dd29a598.pdf.

47.

Harrison RF, Brennan M, North PM, Reed JV, Wickham EA. Is routine episiotomy necessary? Br Med J. 1984;288(6435):1971–5.CrossRef

48.

Sleep J, Grant A, Garcia J, Elbourne D, Spencer J, Chalmers I. West Berkshire perineal management trial. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1984;289(6445):587–90. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.289.6445.587.CrossRef

49.

Carroli G, Mignini L. Episiotomy for vaginal birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;1:CD000081.

50.

Rockner G, Wahlberg V, Olund A. Episiotomy and perineal trauma during childbirth. J Adv Nurs 1989;14:264–268. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.1989.tb03412.x.

51.

Kettle C, Tohill S. Perineal care. BMJ Clin Evid. 2008;2008:1401.

52.

De la Rosa-Várez Z, Rivas-Castillo MT, Alguacil Sánchez MV. Maniobras de protección perineal: manejo expectante frente a manejo activo. Revisión de la bibliografía. Matronas profesión. 2013;14:19–23 Available from: http://www.federacion-matronas.org/rs/1019/d112d6ad-54ec-438b-9358-4483f9e98868/0d3/fd/1/filename/revision-maniobras-14-1.pdf.

53.

Correa Junior MD, Passini JR. Selective episiotomy: indications, Techinique, and association with severe perineal lacerations. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2016;38(6):301–7. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0036-1584942.CrossRefPubMed

54.

Muraca GM, Liu S, Sabr Y, Lisonkova S, Skoll A, Brant R, et al. Episiotomy use among vaginal deliveries and the association with anal sphincter injury: a population-based retrospective cohort study. Can Med Assoc J. 2019;191(42):E1149 LP–E1158 Available from: http://www.cmaj.ca/content/191/42/E1149.abstract.CrossRef

55.

ACOG. Practice Bulletin No. 165: prevention and Management of Obstetric Lacerations at vaginal delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;128(1):e1–15. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000001523.CrossRef

56.

NICE. Intrapartum care for healthy women and babies (Clinical guideline [CG190]). UK; 2017. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg190. Accessed 9 Aug 2021.

57.

Kupersmith J. Quality of care in teaching hospitals: a literature review. Acad Med. 2005;80(5):458–66. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200505000-00012.CrossRefPubMed

58.

Ayanian JZ, Weissman JS. Teaching hospitals and quality of care: a review of the literature. Milbank Q. 2002;80(3):569–93, v. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0009.00023.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

59.

Shahian DM, Nordberg P, Meyer GS, Blanchfield BB, Mort EA, Torchiana DF, et al. Contemporary performance of U.S. teaching and nonteaching hospitals. Acad Med. 2012;87(6):701–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e318253676a.CrossRefPubMed

60.

Kozhimannil KB, Karaca-Mandic P, Blauer-Peterson CJ, Shah NT, Snowden JM. Uptake and utilization of practice guidelines in hospitals in the United States: the case of routine episiotomy. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2017;43(1):41–48. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjq.2016.10.002.

61.

Eckman A, Ramanah R, Gannard E, Clement MC, Collet G, Courtois L, et al. Évaluation d’une politique restrictive d’épisiotomie avant et après les recommandations du Collège national des gynécologues obstétriciens français. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod. 2010;39(1):37–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgyn.2009.09.013.CrossRef

62.

Reinbold D, Éboue C, Morello R, Lamendour N, Herlicoviez M, Dreyfus M. De l’impact des RPC pour réduire le taux d ’ épisiotomie. J Gynecol Obstet Biol la Reprod 2012;41(1):62–68. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgyn.2011.08.006

63.

Cabana MD, Rand CS, Powe NR, Wu AW, Wilson MH, Abboud PA, et al. Why don’t physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? A framework for improvement. JAMA. 1999;282(15):1458–65. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.282.15.1458.CrossRefPubMed

64.

Joshi A, Acharya R. Perineal outcome after restrictive use of episiotomy in primi-gravidas. J Nepal Med Assoc. 2009;48(176):269–72.

65.

Lai CY, Cheung HW, Hsi Lao TT, Lau TK, Leung TY. Is the policy of restrictive episiotomy generalisable? A prospective observational study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2009;22(12):1116–21. https://doi.org/10.3109/14767050902994820.CrossRefPubMed

66.

Zhang-Rutledge K, Clark SL, Denning S, Timmins A, Dildy GA, Gandhi M. An initiative to reduce the episiotomy rate: Association of Feedback and the Hawthorne effect with leapfrog goals. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;130(1):146–50. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000002060.CrossRefPubMed

67.

Pronovost PJ. Enhancing physicians’ use of clinical guidelines. JAMA. 2013;310(23):2501–2. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.281334.CrossRefPubMed

68.

Althabe F, Bergel E, Cafferata ML, Gibbons L, Ciapponi A, Aleman A, et al. Strategies for improving the quality of health care in maternal and child health in low- and middle-income countries: an overview of systematic reviews. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol. 2008;22(Suppl 1):42–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3016.2007.00912.x.CrossRefPubMed

69.

Flodgren G, Eccles MP, Shepperd S, Scott A, Parmelli E, Beyer FR. An overview of reviews evaluating the effectiveness of financial incentives in changing healthcare professional behaviours and patient outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;7:CD009255.

70.

Clesse C, Lighezzolo-Alnot J, De Lavergne S, Hamlin S, Scheffler M. Statistical trends of episiotomy around the world: Comparative systematic review of changing practices. Health Care Women Int 2018;39(6):644–662. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/07399332.2018.1445253.

71.

Kitson A, Harvey G, McCormack B. Enabling the implementation of evidence based practice: a conceptual framework. Qual Health Care. 1998;7(3):149–58. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.7.3.149.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

72.

World Health Organization. Recommendations for augmentation of labour: highlights and key messages from the World Health Organization’s 2014 global recommendations. Geneva; 2015. Available from: https://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/maternal_perinatal_health/augmentation-labour/en/. Accessed 9 Aug 2021.

73.

Bohren MA, Hofmeyr GJ, Sakala C, Fukuzawa RK, Cuthbert A. Continuous support for women during childbirth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;7:CD003766.PubMed

Title: Health care workers’ perceptions of episiotomy in the era of respectful maternity care: a qualitative study of an obstetric training program in Mexico
Authors: Rodrigo Garcia-Cerde
Pilar Torres-Pereda
Marisela Olvera-Garcia
Jennifer Hulme
Publication date: 01-12-2021
Publisher: BioMed Central
Keywords: Care
Episiotomy
Published in: BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2393
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-021-04022-x

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Springer Medicine

Health care workers’ perceptions of episiotomy in the era of respectful maternity care: a qualitative study of an obstetric training program in Mexico

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Determinants of childbirth care quality along the care continuum in limited resource settings: A structural equation modeling analysis of cross-sectional data from Burkina Faso and Côte d’Ivoire

Association between antenatal ultrasound findings and neonatal outcomes in rural Uganda: a secondary analysis

Challenging the status quo: results of an acceptability and feasibility study of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) management pathways in Indonesian primary care

Plasma fibulin-1 levels during pregnancy and delivery: a longitudinal observational study

Stress and coping among unmarried pregnant university students in South Africa

Busy day effect on intrapartum adverse maternal outcomes – a population‐based study of 601 247 singleton deliveries