Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Reproductive Health
Published in: Reproductive Health 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research

Episiotomy and obstetric outcomes among women living with type 3 female genital mutilation: a secondary analysis

Authors: Maria I. Rodriguez, Armando Seuc, Lale Say, Michelle J. Hindin

Published in: Reproductive Health | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

To investigate the association between type of episiotomy and obstetric outcomes among 6,187 women with type 3 Female Genital Mutilation (FGM).

Methods

We conducted a secondary analysis of women presenting in labor to 28 obstetric centres in Burkina Faso, Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, Senegal and Sudan between November 2001 and March 2003. Data were analysed using cross tabulations and multivariable logistic regression to determine if type of episiotomy by FGM classification had a significant impact on key maternal outcomes. Our main outcome measures were anal sphincter tears, intrapartum blood loss requiring an intervention, and postpartum haemorrhage.

Results

Type of episiotomy performed varied significantly by FGM status. Among women without FGM, the most common type of episiotomy performed was posterior lateral (25.4 %). The prevalence of the most extensive type of episiotomy, anterior and posterior lateral episiotomy increased with type of FGM. Among women without FGM, 0.4 % had this type of episiotomy. This increased to 0.6 % for women with FGM Types 1, 2 or 4 and to 54.6 % of all women delivering vaginally with FGM Type 3. After adjustment, women with an anterior episiotomy, (AOR = 0.15 95 %; CI 0.06–0.40); posterior lateral episiotomy (AOR = 0.68 95 %; CI 0.50–0.94) or both anterior and posterior lateral episiotomies performed concurrently (AOR = 0.21 95 % CI 0.12–0.36) were all significantly less likely to have anal sphincter tears compared to women without episiotomies. Women with anterior episiotomy (AOR = 0.08; 95%CI 0.02–0.24), posterior lateral episiotomy (AOR = 0.17 95 %; CI 0.05–0.52) and the combination of the two (AOR = 0.04 95 % CI 0.01–0.11) were significantly less likely to have postpartum haemorrhage compared with women who had no episiotomy.

Conclusions

Among women living with FGM Type 3, episiotomies were protective against anal sphincter tears and postpartum haemorrhage. Further clinical and research is needed to guide clinical practice of when episiotomies should be performed.
Literature
1.
UNAIDS U, UNECA, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNHCHR, UNHCR, UNICEF, UNIFEM, WHO. Eliminating female genital mutilation: an interagency statement. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2008.
2.
Berg RC, Odgaard-Jensen J, Fretheim A, Underland V, Vist G. An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the obstetric consequences of female genital mutilation/cutting. Obstet Gynecol Int. 2014;2014:542859.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
WHO study group on female genital mutilation and obstetric outcome: WHO collaborative prospective study in six African countries. Lancet. 2006;367:1835–41.
4.
WHO. A Systematic Review of the Health Complications of Female Genital Mutilation including Sequelae in Childbirth. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2000.
5.
WHO. Managing complications in pregnancy and childbirth: a guide for midwives and doctors. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003.
6.
Abdulcadir J RM, Say L. Research gaps in the care of women with Female Genital Mutilation: an analysis. BJOG. 2014. in press
7.
Balogun OO, Hirayama F, Wariki WM, Koyanagi A, Mori R. Interventions for improving outcomes for pregnant women who have experienced genital cutting. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;2, CD009872.
8.
WHO. WHO guidelines on the management of health complications from female genital mutilation. Geneva: WHO; 2016.
9.
Rushwan H. Female genital mutilation (FGM) management during pregnancy, childbirth and the postpartum period. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2000;70:99–104.CrossRefPubMed
10.
De Silva S. Obstetric sequelae of female circumcision. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1989;32:233–40.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Sheiner E, Sarid L, Levy A, Seidman DS, Hallak M. Obstetric risk factors and outcome of pregnancies complicated with early postpartum hemorrhage: a population-based study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2005;18:149–54.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Carroli G, Mignini L. Episiotomy for vaginal birth. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009:CD000081.
13.
Kalis V, Laine K, de Leeuw JW, Ismail KM, Tincello DG. Classification of episiotomy: towards a standardisation of terminology. BJOG. 2012;119:522–6.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Shaw E. Female circumcision. What kind of maternity care do circumcised women need? Am J Nurs. 1985:684–7
15.
WHO. Management of pregnancy, childbirth and the postpartum period in the presence of female genital mutilation. Report of a WHO technical consultation. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1997.
16.
WHO. Female Genital Mutilation. Integrating the prevention and the management of the health complications into the curricula of nursing and midwifery. Geneva: WHO; 2001.
17.
Female Genital Mutilation and its Management: RCOG; 2015 July 2015.
18.
Bishai D, Bonnenfant YT, Darwish M, et al. Estimating the obstetric costs of female genital mutilation in six African countries. Bull World Health Organ. 2010;(4)88:281–8.
19.
Diggle PJ HP, Liang K-Y, Zeger SL. Analysis of longitudinal data. New York City: Oxford University Press; 2002.
Metadata
Title
Episiotomy and obstetric outcomes among women living with type 3 female genital mutilation: a secondary analysis
Authors
Maria I. Rodriguez
Armando Seuc
Lale Say
Michelle J. Hindin
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Reproductive Health / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1742-4755
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-016-0242-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Reproductive Health 1/2015 Go to the issue

Research

Traditional birth attendants (TBAs) as potential agents in promoting male involvement in maternity preparedness: insights from a rural community in Uganda

Research

Is protease inhibitors based antiretroviral therapy during pregnancy associated with an increased risk of preterm birth? Systematic review and a meta-analysis

Research

Who’s that girl? A qualitative analysis of adolescent girls’ views on factors associated with teenage pregnancies in Bolgatanga, Ghana

Research

Trends in the incidence of possible severe bacterial infection and case fatality rates in rural communities in Sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia and Latin America, 2010–2013: a multicenter prospective cohort study

Research

The neonatal mortality and its determinants in rural communities of Eastern Uganda

Study protocol

PREventing Maternal And Neonatal Deaths (PREMAND): a study protocol for examining social and cultural factors contributing to infant and maternal deaths and near-misses in rural northern Ghana