|
Effects of Episioguide a 60? mediolateral episiotomy guide device on post suture episiotomy angle: a randomized controlled trial |
|---|---|
| รหัสดีโอไอ | |
| Creator | Chatsaran Thanapongpibul |
| Title | Effects of Episioguide a 60? mediolateral episiotomy guide device on post suture episiotomy angle: a randomized controlled trial |
| Contributor | Maysita Suksamarnwong |
| Publisher | PIMDEE Co., Ltd. |
| Publication Year | 2565 |
| Journal Title | Thai Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology |
| Journal Vol. | 30 |
| Journal No. | 1 |
| Page no. | 7-14 |
| Keyword | episiotomy, episioguide, angle of incision, obstetrical anal sphincter injuries (OASIS), post-suture angle |
| URL Website | https://tci-thaijo.org/index.php/tjog/index |
| Website title | www.tci-thaijo.org |
| ISSN | 2673-0871 |
| Abstract | Objectives: To compare the post-suture episiotomy angle between groups on which the Episioguide a 60? mediolateral episiotomy (MLE) guide device was used and not used in the performanceof MLE.Materials and Methods: This prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted at the HRHPrincess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn Medical Center, Nakhon Nayok, Thailand. Eligible womenwere randomized into two groups, the first group was women who had a MLE using theEpisioguide and the second group was women who had a conventional MLE. The primaryoutcome was a comparison of the rates of post-suture episiotomy angle in the safe zone (30?-60?) between the groups.Results: One-hundred and twelve eligible pregnant women were recruited, of whom 88 underwentrandomization, 44 each in the Episioguide and conventional MLE groups. The procedures usingthe Episioguide had a significantly higher rate of a post-suture episiotomy angle in the desired30?-60? range (relative risk (RR) 1.526, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.023-2.277, p = 0.032),and there was a statistically significant difference in mean post suture angle between the twogroups, 34.636? ? 9.445? in the Episioguide group and 27.614? ? 9.267? in the standard proceduregroup (mean difference 7.022, 95%CI 3.057-10.988, p = 0.001).Conclusion: Using the Episioguide to perform a MLE achieved a significantly higher rate of post-sutureepisiotomy angle in the safe zone compared with conventional MLE. |
