Midwifery care measures in the second stage of labor and reduction of genital tract trauma at birth: a randomized trial. Traditional care of the perineum during birth. A prospective, randomized, multicenter study of 1,076 women. A comparison of "hands off" versus "hands on" techniques for decreasing perineal lacerations during birth. The use of liquid petroleum jelly in the prevention of perineal lacerations during birth. A randomised controlled trial of care of the perineum during second stage of normal labour. Modified Ritgen's maneuver for anal sphincter injury at delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Perineal outcomes and maternal comfort related to the application of perineal warm packs in the second stage of labor: a randomized controlled trial. Perineal massage in labour and prevention of perineal trauma: randomised controlled trial.
Genital tract trauma after spontaneous vaginal childbirth is common, and evidence-based prevention measures have not been identified beyond minimizing the use of episiotomy. This study randomized 1211 healthy women in midwifery care at the University of New Mexico teaching hospital to 1 of 3 care measures late in the second stage of labor: 1) warm compresses to the perineal area, 2) massage with lubricant, or 3) no touching of the perineum until crowning of the infant's head. The purpose was to assess whether any of these measures was associated with lower levels of obstetric trauma. After each birth, the clinical midwife recorded demographic, clinical care, and outcome data, including the location and extent of any genital tract trauma. The frequency distribution of genital tract trauma was equal in all three groups. Individual women and their clinicians should decide whether to use these techniques on the basis of maternal comfort and other considerations. To investigate the influence of the traditional hands-on versus the innovative hands-poised method on the risk of perineal trauma during vaginal delivery and on neonatal outcomes.
                In a prospective, randomized, multicenter study, 1,161 of 1,505 women giving birth at the Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology of the University Hospital of Vienna and Semmelweis Women's Hospital, Vienna, between February and September 1999, were randomized into the trial. In the hands-on method, the left hand of the midwife puts pressure on the infant's head, and the right hand is placed against the perineum. In the hands-poised method, the midwife guides the parturient through the birth without touching the perineum, prepared to apply light pressure on the infant's head.
                One hundred eighty-seven of 574 women (32.5%) in the hands-on group and 180 of 502 women (35.8%) in the hands-poised group experienced perineal tears (P = .5). Sixteen women (2.7%) treated with the hands-on method developed third-degree perineal tears as compared with five women (0.9%) treated with the hands-poised method (P < .05). In the hands-on group, 103 women (17.9%) underwent episiotomy as compared with 51 cases (10.1%) in the hands-poised group (P < .01). No significant differences in neonatal outcomes were observed between the two groups.
                Our data suggest that a policy of hands-poised care is more suitable for preserving the perineum during birth and is a safe and effective birthing alternative for women. Our goal was to determine the frequency, degree, and location of perineal lacerations and the neonatal outcomes associated with the use of two techniques of perineal protection--expectant ("hands off") and interventionist ("hands on")--during childbirth. We conducted a randomized controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of two techniques for perineum protection during spontaneous delivery. Study participants included 70 nulliparous expectant mothers, who were divided equally between the "hands off" and "hands on" groups (n = 35 per group). Perineal laceration occurred in 81.4% of the women. Among these, first-degree lacerations were predominant (82.5%). Lacerations in the anterior and posterior regions of the perineum occurred with similar frequencies. Laceration rates did not differ between the "hands off" and "hands on" groups (P > .05). Neonatal outcomes were similar in both groups. The use of "hands off" technique of perineal protection does not alter the frequency or degree of perineal lacerations in childbirth, relative to a "hands on" technique. Most of vaginal births are accompanied by lacerations in the genital tract. This was a randomized study carried out in a Birth Center located in São Paulo city to evaluate the efficacy of liquid petroleum jelly in reducing perineal laceration. The sample was composed of 38 nulliparous women per group (experimental and control). In the experimental group was used 30 ml of the petroleum jelly in the perineal region during the expulsive period. The parturient were allowed to push spontaneously during the delivery and remained in the left side position. The frequency of perineal laceration was similar in both groups (experimental 63.2% versus control 60.5%). The posterior perineum region presented the highest frequency of trauma (53.2%). Of the total cases of perineal trauma, 72.3% were first-degree lacerations. The use of liquid petroleum jelly of perineal protection does not reduce the frequency neither the degree of lacerations in childbirth. To compare the effect of two methods of perineal management used during spontaneous vaginal delivery on the prevalence of perineal pain reported at 10 days after birth.
                Randomised controlled trial.
                Two English maternity care units.
                5471 women who gave birth between December 1994 and December 1996.
                At the end of the second stage of labour women were allocated to either the 'hands on' method, in which the midwife's hands put pressure on the baby's head and support ('guard') the perineum; lateral flexion is then used to facilitate delivery of the shoulders, or the 'hands poised' method, in which the midwife keeps her hands poised, not touching the head or perineum, allowing spontaneous delivery of the shoulders.
                Perineal pain in the previous 24 hours reported by women in self-administered questionnaire 10 days after birth.
                Questionnaires were completed by 97% of women at 10 days after birth. 910 (34.1%) women in the 'hands poised' group reported pain in the previous 24 hours compared with 823 (31.1%) in the 'hands on' group (RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.18: absolute difference 3%, 0.5% to 5%, P = 0.02). The rate of episiotomy was significantly lower in the 'hands poised' group (RR 0.79, 99% CI 0.65 to 0.96, P = 0.008) but the rate of manual removal of placenta was significantly higher (RR 1.69, 99% CI 1.02 to 2.78; P = 0.008). There were no other statistically significant differences detected between the two methods.
                The reduction in pain observed in the 'hands on' group was statistically significant and the difference detected potentially affects a substantial number of women. These results provide evidence to enable individual women and health professionals to decide which perineal management is preferable. To investigate whether Ritgen's maneuver decreases the risk of third- to fourth-degree perineal tears compared with simple perineal support.
                A total of 1,623 nulliparous women in term labor, singleton pregnancy, and cephalic presentation were randomly assigned to Ritgen's maneuver or standard care. Ritgen's maneuver denotes extracting the fetal head, using one hand to pull the fetal chin from between the maternal anus and the coccyx, and the other on the fetal occiput to control speed of delivery. Ritgen's maneuver was performed during a uterine contraction, rather than, as originally recommended, between contractions. Our standard care entailed perineal support with one hand and control of the speed of crowning with the other, and use of Ritgen's maneuver only on specific indications. Women delivered by cesarean delivery (n=10) or instrumentally (n=142) were excluded, as well as 39 erroneously included women (parous or in preterm labor), six inaccurately assigned participants, one with missing data, and two participants who withdrew consent. For the remaining 1,423 women, the result was analyzed according to intention to treat.
                Ritgen's maneuver was performed in 554 (79.6%) of 696 women randomly assigned to this procedure and in 31 (4.3%) of 727 women randomly assigned to simple perineal support. The rate of third- to fourth-degree tears was 5.5% (n=38) in women assigned to Ritgen's maneuver and 4.4% (n=32) in those assigned to simple perineal support (relative risk 1.24; 95% confidence interval 0.78-1.96).
                Ritgen's maneuver does not decrease the risk of anal sphincter injury at delivery, at least not when performed during a contraction. Perineal warm packs are widely used during childbirth in the belief that they reduce perineal trauma and increase comfort during late second stage of labor. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of applying warm packs to the perineum on perineal trauma and maternal comfort during the late second stage of labor.
                A randomized controlled trial was undertaken. In the late second stage of labor, nulliparous women (n = 717) giving birth were randomly allocated to have warm packs (n = 360) applied to their perineum or to receive standard care (n = 357). Standard care was defined as any second-stage practice carried out by midwives that did not include the application of warm packs to the perineum. Analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis, and the primary outcome measures were requirement for perineal suturing and maternal comfort.
                The difference in the number of women who required suturing after birth was not significant. Women in the warm pack group had significantly fewer third- and fourth-degree tears and they had significantly lower perineal pain scores when giving birth and on "day 1" and "day 2" after the birth compared with the standard care group. At 3 months, they were significantly less likely to have urinary incontinence compared with women in the standard care group.
                The application of perineal warm packs in late second stage does not reduce the likelihood of nulliparous women requiring perineal suturing but significantly reduces third- and fourth-degree lacerations, pain during the birth and on days 1 and 2, and urinary incontinence. This simple, inexpensive practice should be incorporated into second stage labor care. To determine the effects of perineal massage in the second stage of labour on perineal outcomes.
                Randomised controlled trial. Participants: At 36 weeks' gestation, women expecting normal birth of a singleton were asked to join the study. Women became eligible to be randomised in labour if they progressed to full dilatation of the cervix or 8 cm or more if nulliparous or 5 cm or more if multiparous. 1340 were randomised into the trial.
                Massage and stretching of the perineum during the second stage of labour with a water soluble lubricant.
                Primary outcomes: rates of intact perineum, episiotomies, and first, second, third, and fourth degree tears.
                pain at three and 10 days postpartum and pain, dyspareunia, resumption of sexual intercourse, and urinary and faecal incontinence and urgency three months postpartum.
                Rates of intact perineums, first and second degree tears, and episiotomies were similar in the massage and the control groups. There were fewer third degree tears in the massage group (12 (1.7%) v 23 (3.6%); absolute risk 2.11, relative risk 0.45; 95% confidence interval 0.23 to 0.93, P<0.04), though the trial was underpowered to measure this rarer outcome. Groups did not differ in any of the secondary outcomes at the three assessment points.
                The practice of perineal massage in labour does not increase the likelihood of an intact perineum or reduce the risk of pain, dyspareunia, or urinary and faecal problems.
The use of warm compresses on the perineum is associated with a decreased occurrence of perineal trauma. The procedure has shown to be acceptable to women and midwives. This procedure may therefore be offered to women.