Birth and Regulation of head Extension to Guide Manual perineal Assistance (BREGMA) study: a prospective cohort study
Jazyk angličtina Země Anglie, Velká Británie Médium electronic
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, multicentrická studie
PubMed
40119314
PubMed Central
PMC11929361
DOI
10.1186/s12884-025-07428-z
PII: 10.1186/s12884-025-07428-z
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Klíčová slova
- Manual perineal protection, Perineal body, Perineal mapping, Perineal tension,
- MeSH
- anální kanál MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- epiziotomie MeSH
- hlava * MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladý dospělý MeSH
- obrat plodu * metody MeSH
- perineum * anatomie a histologie MeSH
- prospektivní studie MeSH
- těhotenství MeSH
- tlak MeSH
- vedení porodu * metody MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladý dospělý MeSH
- těhotenství MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- multicentrická studie MeSH
BACKGROUND: The exact positioning of the dominant hand at the time of manual perineal protection (MPP) is not clearly specified. The main aim of this work was to identify the place on the perineum where pressure needs to be applied to achieve optimal forward fetal head displacement away from the anal sphincters using the bregma to posterior fourchette distance (BFD) and the perineal body length (PBL). METHODS: This was a two-center prospective cohort study. Term cephalic singleton nulliparous women having spontaneous vaginal delivery were considered eligible for recruitment into the study. Once crowning was diagnosed and just prior the initiation of manual perineal protection (MPP) or cutting an episiotomy, the BFD and PBL were measured using a standardized measurement protocol. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: A total of 100 women (50 women in each center) were recruited into the study. The overall mean BFD was 2.8 ± 0.5 cm. The overall mean PBL was 4.4 ± 0.8 cm. There were no statistically significant differences between the measurements taken in both units regarding BFD or PBL (p = 0.81 and 0.10 respectively). There was a weak correlation between both measurements. Based on our measured parameters, it seems that the most effective point to apply perineal pressure to displace the head away from the anus is approximately 1 - 1.5 cm anterior to the anal margin. CONCLUSION: Measurements generated by this study will form the bases of future biomechanical studies to confirm their validity.
Biomedical Center Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen Charles University Pilsen Czech Republic
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology Agaplesion General Hospital Hagen Hagen Germany
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology University Hospital Pilsen Czech Republic
Zobrazit více v PubMed
Third- and Fourth-degree Perineal Tears, Management (Green-top Guideline No. 29). https://www.rcog.org.uk/en/guidelines-research-services/guidelines/gtg29/. Accessed 9 Jan 2022.
Aglialoro M. The contribution of the Salerno School to the historical evolution of protection and suturing of the perineum in labor. Minerva Med. 1970;61:5201–3. PubMed
Dewees WB. Relaxation and Management of the Perineum During Parturition. Read before the Golden Belt District Medical Society of Kansas, July 4, 1889. JAMA. 1889;XIII(24):841–8.
Ismail KMK, Paschetta E, Papoutsis D, Freeman RM. Perineal support and risk of obstetric anal sphincter injuries: A Delphi survey. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. 2015;94(2):165–74. PubMed
Kleprlikova H, Kalis V, Lucovnik M, Rusavy Z, Blaganje M, Thakar R, et al. Manual perineal protection: The know-how and the know-why. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. 2020;99(4):445–50. PubMed
Kalis V, Rusavy Z, Havelkova L, Zitka T, et al. Metrics of perineal support (MOPS) study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020;20:1–6. PubMed PMC
Manresa M, Kalis V, de Tayrac R, de Leeuw JW, Laine K, Räisänen S, et al. Hands up if you do not understand hands on. Midwifery. 2020;90:102836. PubMed
Ali-Masri H, Hassan S, Fosse E, Zimmo KM, Zimmo M, Ismail KMK, et al. Impact of electronic and blended learning programs for manual perineal support on incidence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries: A prospective interventional study. BMC Med Educ. 2018;18(1):258. PubMed PMC
Ali HY, Vikanes Å, Anti M, Hassan S, Ismail KM, Zimmo K, et al. Evaluation of an animated instructional video as a training tool for manual perineum support during vaginal delivery. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2017;137(2):213–9. PubMed
Jansova M, Kalis V, Lobovsky L, Hyncik L, Karbanova J, Rusavy Z. The role of thumb and index finger placement in manual perineal protection. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25(11):1533-40. PubMed
Jansova M, Kalis V, Rusavy Z, Zemčík R, Lobovsky L, Laine K. Modeling manual perineal protection during vaginal delivery. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25(1):65-71. PubMed
Jansova M, Kalis V, Rusavy Z, Räisänen S, Lobovsky L, Laine K. Fetal head size and effect of manual perineal protection. PLoS One. 2017;12(12):e0189842. PubMed PMC
Zemčík R, Karbanova J, Kalis V, Lobovský L, Jansová M, Rusavy Z. Stereophotogrammetry of the perineum during vaginal delivery. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2012;119(1):76-80. PubMed
Laine K, Pirhonen T, Rolland R, Pirhonen J. Decreasing the incidence of anal sphincter tears during delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111(5):1053-7. PubMed
Laine K, Skjeldestad FE, Sandvik L, Staff AC. Incidence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries after training to protect the perineum: Cohort study. BMJ Open. 2012;2(5):e001649. PubMed PMC
Poulsen MO, Madsen ML, Skriver-Møller AC, Overgaard C. Does the Finnish intervention prevent obstetric anal sphincter injuries? A systematic review of the literature. BMJ Open. 2015;5(9):e008346. PubMed PMC
Kalis V, Jansova M, Rusavy Z. Perineal Mapping. In: Ismail K. (eds) Perineal Trauma at Childbirth. Cham: Springer; 2016. 10.1007/978-3-319-14860-1_3.
Cechova H, Kalis V, Havelkova L, Rusavy Z, Fiala P, Rybarova M, et al. Finite element modeling of maximum stress in pelvic floor structures during the head expulsion (FINESSE) study. Int Urogynecol J. 2021;32(7):1997-2003. PubMed
Kalis V, Karbanova J, Horak M, Lobovsky L, Kralickova M, Rokyta Z. The incision angle of mediolateral episiotomy before delivery and after repair. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2008;103(1):5-8. PubMed
Kalis V, Landsmanova J, Bednarova B, Karbanova J, Laine K, Rokyta Z. Evaluation of the incision angle of mediolateral episiotomy at 60 degrees. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2011;112(3):220-4. PubMed
Kalis V, Karbanova J, Bukacova Z, Bednarova B, Rokyta Z, Kralickova M. Anal dilation during labor. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2010;109(2):136-9. PubMed
Rizk DEE, Thomas L. Relationship between the length of the perineum and position of the anus and vaginal delivery in primigravidae. Int Urogynecol J. 2000;11(2):79-83. PubMed
Meriwether K V., Rogers RG, Dunivan GC, Alldredge JK, Qualls C, Migliaccio L, et al. Perineal body stretch during labor does not predict perineal laceration, postpartum incontinence, or postpartum sexual function: a cohort study. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(8):1193-200. PubMed PMC
Pihl S, Uustal E, Blomberg M. Anovaginal distance and obstetric anal sphincter injury: a prospective observational study. Int Urogynecol J. 2019;30(6):939-944. PubMed PMC