| Title |
Prospective comparison of obstetric anal sphincter injury incidence between an Asian and Western hospital
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00192-018-3649-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lucy J. Bates, Jerome Melon, Robin Turner, Symphorosa S. C. Chan, Emmanuel Karantanis |
| Abstract |
Obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASIS) rates are reported to be higher in Asian women living in Western countries than in those living in Asia, but the reasons for the differences remain unclear. The objectives of this study were for a single examiner to prospectively compare OASIS rates in primiparous Asian women in an Asian and Western birth unit and determine potential birth factors that may influence the possible difference in OASIS incidence. This was a prospective observational study based in Hong Kong, China, and Sydney, Australia, involving primiparous women > 36 weeks gestation of Asian descent undergoing vaginal delivery. A single examiner recorded basic patient demographics, observed all the deliveries at both sites, noting birthing techniques, and then examined the women, including a rectal examination, to determine OASIS incidence. Seventy births in Hong Kong and 66 in Sydney were studied. The incidence of OASIS was 34% in Sydney and 10% in Hong Kong (p = 0.001). Birthweight, epidural rate, body mass index, and instrumental delivery were higher in Sydney. Episiotomy rates were higher in Hong Kong (59.2% vs. 82.9%; p = 0.007). When comparing OASIS with no-OASIS, perineal length (OR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.76, p = 0.004) and birthweight (OR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.30, p = 0.039) were independent risk factors for OASIS. The incidence of OASIS in Asian women is significantly higher in a Western than in an Asian setting. In Asian women, perineal length and birthweight can affect the risk of OASIS at the time of vaginal delivery. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
| Researcher | 3 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 15 | 50% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 47% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 13 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 June 2020.
All research outputs
#2,761,725
of 25,658,541 outputs
Outputs from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#172
of 2,916 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,566
of 342,844 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#7
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,658,541 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,916 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,844 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.