The OASI care bundle quality improvement project: lessons learned and future direction

Rising rates of obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) led to a collaborative effort by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) and the Royal College of Midwives (RCM) to develop and evaluate the OASI Care Bundle (OASI-CB). The OASI-CB comprises four practices (antenatal discussion about OASI, manual perineal protection, mediolateral episiotomy at 60° from the midline, and systematic examination of the perineum, vagina and ano-rectum after vaginal birth) and was initially implemented as part of a quality improvement (QI) project—“OASI1”—in 16 maternity units across Great Britain. Evaluation of the OASI1 project found that the care bundle reduced OASI rates and identified several barriers and enablers to implementation. This paper summarises the key findings, including strengths, limitations and lessons learned from the OASI1 QI project, and provides rationale for further evaluation of the OASI-CB.

A core outcome set development for a French national prospective study about the effect of mediolateral episiotomy on obstetric anal sphincter injury during operative vaginal delivery (INSTRUMODA)

Background We aimed at developing a core outcome and variables of interest set to investigate the effects of mediolateral episiotomy on Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury (OASI) during and after operative delivery in nulliparous women in a large-scale one-year observational French study including 15,000 women (INSTRUMODA). Methods A list of outcomes and variables of interest was suggested to obstetricians participating in the INSTRUMODA study using online questionnaires divided into 7 categories: the woman’s history and course of pregnancy, course of labor, modalities of operative delivery, episiotomy characteristics, immediate maternal morbidity, one-year maternal morbidity, immediate neonatal morbidity. We used a three-round DELPHI method to reach a consensus. In the first round, outcomes and variables considered as essential by 70% or more of obstetricians were included in the corpus whereas they were excluded when 70% rated them as “not important”. In the second round, non-consensual outcomes and variables were reassessed and excluded or definitively included if considered as “not important” or essential by 50% or more of the obstetricians. During the first round, obstetricians were invited to suggest new outcomes and/or variables that were then assessed in the second and third round. We used the same method to develop a core outcome and variables of interest set in a population of women in the community recruited via an association of patients. At the end of the procedure the core outcome and variables of interest sets were merged to provide the final core outcome set for the INSTRUMODA study. Results Fifty-three obstetricians and 16 women filled out questionnaires. After the 3 rounds of Delphi procedure in each population, 74 outcomes and variables were consensually reported by obstetricians and 92 by women in the community. By mixing these two consensual corpora we reported a final consensual list of 114 variables of interest and outcomes for both obstetricians and women. Conclusion We established a core outcome and variables of interest set among obstetricians and women in the community to investigate the association between mediolateral episiotomy and OASI during operative delivery. Trial registration The INSTRUMODA study was registered on https://clinicaltrials.gov on June 25, 2020 (NCT04446780).

A comparative study of two layer versus three-layer repair of mediolateral episiotomy

Background: Since majority of the women attending study hospital are belonging to lower socioeconomic strata and active involvement of paramedical staff in providing obstetric care, this study was undertaken to find the utility of a two-layer repair of mediolateral episiotomy and compare it with the standard method of closure in relation to its simplicity, cost-effectiveness and superiority if any, over the traditional three-layered repair of episiotomy.Methods: This was a prospective interventional study comparing 100 women who underwent two-layer closure with 100 women who underwent three-layer closure of episiotomy in a tertiary care hospital in Pune, India over a period of 2 years from October 2012 to October 2014. The parameters assessed were operative time, number of suture materials required, immediate post procedure pain and complications at follow-up. Qualitative and quantitative data was analysed using unpaired t-test, chi square test and Fisher exact test.Results: Both the groups were comparable in terms of hospital stay and wound complications such as oedema, dehiscence, hematoma, requirement of resuturing, cosmesis and long-term complications such as dyspareunia. However, two-layer repair required less operative time, lesser number of suture materials and decreased pain during hospital stay as there was statistically significant difference observed between the two groups.Conclusions: In this study experience, it can be concluded that two-layer repair of episiotomy is faster, with less post-operative pain and more cost effective. Hence it provides mother with better services.