Mesh inlay, mesh kit or native tissue repair for women having repeat anterior or posterior prolapse surgery: randomised controlled trial (PROSPECT)

Funding The project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme (Project Number 07/60/18). The Health Services Research Unit and the Health Economics Research Unit are funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates. Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank the women who participated in the PROSPECT study. We also thank Margaret MacNeil for her secretarial support and data management; Dawn McRae and Lynda Constable for their trial management support; the programming team in CHaRT, led by Gladys McPherson; members of the Project Management Group for their ongoing advice and support of the study; and the staff at the recruitment sites who facilitated the recruitment, treatment and follow up of study participants.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Achieving sustainable quality in maternity services – using audit of incontinence and dyspareunia to identify shortfalls in meeting standards

BACKGROUND: Some complications of childbirth (for example, faecal incontinence) are a source of social embarrassment for women, and are often under reported. Therefore, it was felt important to determine levels of complications (against established standards) and to consider obstetric measures aimed at reducing them. METHODS: Clinical information was collected on 1036 primiparous women delivering at North and South Staffordshire Acute and Community Trusts over a 5-month period in 1997. A questionnaire was sent to 970 women which included self-assessment of levels of incontinence and dyspareunia prior to pregnancy, at 6 weeks post delivery and 9 to 14 months post delivery. RESULTS: The response rate was 48%(470/970). Relatively high levels of obstetric interventions were found. In addition, the rates of instrumental deliveries differed between the two hospitals. The highest rates of postnatal symptoms had occurred at 6 weeks, but for many women problems were still present at the time of the survey. At 9–14 months high rates of dyspareunia (29%(102/347)) and urinary incontinence (35%(133/382)) were reported. Seventeen women (4%) complained of faecal incontinence at this time. Similar rates of urinary incontinence and dyspareunia were seen regardless of mode of delivery. CONCLUSION: Further work should be undertaken to reduce the obstetric interventions, especially instrumental deliveries. Improvements in a number of areas of care should be undertaken, including improved patient information, improved professional communication and improved professional recognition and management of third degree tears. It is likely that these measures would lead to a reduction in incontinence and dyspareunia after childbirth

Management of obstetric anal sphincter injury: a systematic review & national practice survey

BACKGROUND: We aim to establish the evidence base for the recognition and management of obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) and to compare this with current practice amongst UK obstetricians and coloproctologists. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature and a postal questionnaire survey of consultant obstetricians, trainee obstetricians and consultant coloproctologists was carried out. RESULTS: We found a wide variation in experience of repairing acute anal sphincter injury. The group with largest experience were consultant obstetricians (46.5% undertaking ≥ 5 repairs/year), whilst only 10% of responding colorectal surgeons had similar levels of experience (p < 0.001). There was extensive misunderstanding in terms of the definition of obstetric anal sphincter injuries. Overall, trainees had a greater knowledge of the correct classification (p < 0.01). Observational studies suggest that a new 'overlap' repair using PDS sutures with antibiotic cover gives better functional results. However, our literature search found only one randomised controlled trial (RCT) on the technique of repair of OASI, which showed no difference in incidence of anal incontinence at three months. Despite this, there was a wide variation in practice, with 337(50%) consultants, 82 (55%) trainees and 80 (89%) coloproctologists already using the 'overlap' method for repair of a torn EAS (p < 0.001). Although over 50% of colorectal surgeons would undertake long-term follow-up of their patients, this was the practice of less than 10% of obstetricians (p < 0.001). Whilst over 70% of coloproctologists would recommend an elective caesarean section in a subsequent pregnancy, only 22% of obstetric consultants and 14% of trainees (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: An agreed classification of OASI, development of national guidelines, formalised training, multidisciplinary management and further definitive research is strongly recommended