OF RECOMMENDATIONS1. Episiotomy should be performed by indication only, and not routinely (Moderate quality evidence +++-; Strong recommendation). Accepted indications for episiotomy are to shorten the second stage of labor when there is suspected fetal hypoxia (Low quality evidence ++-; Weak recommendation); to prevent obstetric anal sphincter injury in vaginal operative deliveries, or when obstetric sphincter injury occurred in previous deliveries (Moderate quality evidence +++-; Strong recommendation)2. Mediolateral or lateral episiotomy technique should be used (Moderate quality evidence +++-; Strong recommendation). Labor ward staff should be offered regular training in correct episiotomy techniques (Moderate quality evidence +++-; Strong recommendation).3. Pain relief needs to be considered before episiotomy is performed, and epidural analgesia may be insufficient. The perineal skin needs to be tested for pain before an episiotomy is performed, even when an epidural is in place. Local anesthetics or pudendal block need to be considered as isolated or additional pain relief methods (Low quality evidence ++-; Strong recommendation).4. After childbirth the perineum should be carefully inspected, and the anal sphincter palpated to identify possible injury (Moderate quality evidence +++-; Strong recommendation). Primary suturing immediately after childbirth should be offered and a continuous suturing technique should be used when repairing an uncomplicated episiotomy (High quality evidence ++++; Strong recommendation).

• MeSH
• anální kanál zranění   MeSH
• bolest MeSH
• dítě MeSH
• epiziotomie * škodlivé účinky   metody   MeSH
• komplikace porodu * etiologie   MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• novorozenec MeSH
• perinatální péče MeSH
• perineum zranění   MeSH
• peripartální období MeSH
• rizikové faktory MeSH
• těhotenství MeSH
• vedení porodu škodlivé účinky   metody   MeSH
• Check Tag
• dítě MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• novorozenec MeSH
• těhotenství MeSH
• ženské pohlaví MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH

INTRODUCTION: This article describes the views of European rural general practitioners regarding the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) of the implementation of a chronic care model (CCM) in European rural primary care. METHODS: This was a mixed-methods online survey. Data were collected from 227 general practitioners between May and December 2017. Categorical data were analysed using descriptive methods while free-text responses were analysed using qualitative methods. The setting was rural primary care in nine European countries (including Central and Eastern Europe). Main outcomes measures were respondents' evaluations of a chronic care model in their rural healthcare settings in terms of SWOT. RESULTS: The SWOT analysis showed that the expertise of healthcare professionals and the strength of relationships and communications between professionals, caregivers and patients are positive components of the CCM system. However, ensuring adequate staffing levels and staff competency are issues that would need to be addressed. Opportunities included the need to enable patients to participate in decision making by ensuring adequate health literacy. CONCLUSION: The CCM could certainly have benefits for health care in rural settings but staffing levels and staff competency would need to be addressed before implementation of CCM in such settings. Improving health literacy among patients and their carers will be essential to ensure their full participation in the implementation of a successful CCM.

• MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• osoby pečující o pacienty MeSH
• poskytování zdravotní péče MeSH
• praktičtí lékaři * MeSH
• primární zdravotní péče MeSH
• venkovské obyvatelstvo MeSH
• Check Tag
• lidé MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH