European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology · 2025
O&G professionals' understanding of levator and OASI Injuries, their views on antenatal counselling and obtaining informed consent for obstetric interventions: An online survey.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Stuart Lilia G, Shek Ka Lai, Dietz Hans Peter
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION/HYPOTHESIS: Obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASI) and levator ani trauma are common maternal injuries. Our aim was to explore the understanding of these injuries by O&G professionals in addition to their views on antenatal counselling and obtaining informed consent for potential maternal birth injuries.
METHODS: An online survey was conducted among O&G professionals across 4 metropolitan Sydney Hospitals. It encompasses twenty-four items in four main domains consisting of a series of multiple-choice questions. These four domains are (1) Respondent characteristics; (2) Understanding/teaching of OASI and levator trauma; (3) Views on antenatal counselling; (4) Views on obtaining written informed consent for obstetric interventions.
RESULTS: 165 individuals responded (32 %), 65 % were midwives and 30 % were doctors. 99 % of them had prior knowledge of OASI, but this figure was only 62 % for levator trauma. More doctors have heard about levator trauma (94 % vs 50 % for midwives; P < 0.001) and more doctors considered themselves to be very well/well informed of the condition (57 % vs 20 % for midwives, P = 0.002). Adequacy of teaching was considered fair/poor for levator trauma by 78 % of respondents compared to 35 % for OASI. Only 26 % learned about levator trauma mainly from standard teaching. 81 % supported discussion of maternal trauma and 76 % supported obtaining written informed consent for obstetric interventions.
CONCLUSION: Levator trauma is much less well recognized than OASI. A lack of standard teaching may be contributory and may constitute one of the challenges in patient counselling and obtaining informed consent for obstetric interventions, supported by the majority of respondents.
METHODS: An online survey was conducted among O&G professionals across 4 metropolitan Sydney Hospitals. It encompasses twenty-four items in four main domains consisting of a series of multiple-choice questions. These four domains are (1) Respondent characteristics; (2) Understanding/teaching of OASI and levator trauma; (3) Views on antenatal counselling; (4) Views on obtaining written informed consent for obstetric interventions.
RESULTS: 165 individuals responded (32 %), 65 % were midwives and 30 % were doctors. 99 % of them had prior knowledge of OASI, but this figure was only 62 % for levator trauma. More doctors have heard about levator trauma (94 % vs 50 % for midwives; P < 0.001) and more doctors considered themselves to be very well/well informed of the condition (57 % vs 20 % for midwives, P = 0.002). Adequacy of teaching was considered fair/poor for levator trauma by 78 % of respondents compared to 35 % for OASI. Only 26 % learned about levator trauma mainly from standard teaching. 81 % supported discussion of maternal trauma and 76 % supported obtaining written informed consent for obstetric interventions.
CONCLUSION: Levator trauma is much less well recognized than OASI. A lack of standard teaching may be contributory and may constitute one of the challenges in patient counselling and obtaining informed consent for obstetric interventions, supported by the majority of respondents.