A randomised trial, conducted by midwives, of perineal repairs comparing a polyglycolic suture material and chromic catgut

Midwifery

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 223-229

  Upton, Alexis ^a   Roberts, Christine L ^b   Ryan, Maureen ^c   Faulkner, Margaret ^a   Reynolds, Maree ^a   Raynes Greenow, Camille ^b  

^a ROYAL PRINCE ALFRED HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^c CENTRAL SYDNEY AREA HEALTH SERVICE   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHROMIC CATGUT; POLYGLYCOLIC ACID; SUTURE MATERIAL; CHROMIUM;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BIRTH; CLINICAL TRIAL; COCHRANE LIBRARY; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE SEVERITY; DYSPAREUNIA; EPISIOTOMY; FEMALE; GESTATIONAL AGE; HUMAN; INFLAMMATION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MATERNITY WARD; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PAIN; PARITY; PERINEUM; PERINEUM SURGERY; PUERPERIUM; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SAMPLE SIZE; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; SUTURE REMOVAL; SUTURING METHOD; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VAGINAL DELIVERY; AUSTRALIA; CATGUT; INJURY; LABOR COMPLICATION; MIDWIFE; PREGNANCY; RISK; STANDARD; SUTURE; TIME; WOUND HEALING;

ADULT; AUSTRALIA; CATGUT; CHROMIUM; FEMALE; HUMANS; MIDWIFERY; OBSTETRIC LABOR COMPLICATIONS; ODDS RATIO; PAIN; PERINEUM; POLYGLYCOLIC ACID; PREGNANCY; SUTURE TECHNIQUES; SUTURES; TIME FACTORS; WOUND HEALING;

EID: 0036730542     PISSN: 02666138     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1054/midw.2002.0313     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Altman DG 1985 Comparability of randomised groups. Statistician 34: 125-136
2. Banninger U, Buhrig H, Schreiner WE 1978 Vergleichende Studie uber die Verwendung von Polyglykolsaure (Dexon) und Chromcatgut als Nahtmaterial bei der Episiotomienaht. Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde 38: 30-33
3. Beard R, Boyd I, Sims C 1974 A trial of polyglycolic acid and chromic catgut sutures in episiotomy repair. British Journal of Clinical Practice 28: 409-410
4. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S et al. 1996 Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. Journal of the American Medical Association 276: 637-639
5. Brown S, Lumley J 1998 Maternal health after childbirth: results of an Australian population based survey. British Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 105: 156-161
6. Chalmers TC, Celano P, Sacks HS et al. 1983 Bias in treatment assignment in controlled clinical trials. New England Journal of Medicine 309: 1358-1361
7. Craig PH, Williams JA, Davis KW et al. 1975 A biologic comparison of polyglactin 910 and polyglycolic acid synthetic absorbable sutures. Surgery, Gynecology & Obstetrics 141: 1-10
8. Echeverria E, Jimenez J 1970 Evaluation of an absorbable synthetic suture material. Surgery, Gynecology & Obstetrics 131: 1-14
9. Gjerdingen D 1993 Changes in women's physical health during the first postpartum year. Archives of Family Medicine 2: 277-283
10. Glazener CM, Abdalla M, Stroud P et al. 1995 Postnatal maternal morbidity: extent, causes, prevention and treatment. British Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 102: 282-287
11. Hermann JB, Kelly RJ, Higgins GA 1970 Polyglycolic acid sutures. Laboratory and clinical evaluation of a new absorbable suture material. Archives of Surgery 100: 486-490
12. Kettle C, Johanson RB 2002 Absorbable synthetic versus catgut suture material for perineal repair. (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, Update Software, Oxford
13. Lawrie P, Angus GE, Reese AJM 1959 The absorption of surgical catgut. British Journal of Surgery 46: 638-642
14. Livingstone E, Simpson D, Naismith WC 1974 A comparison between catgut and polyglycolic acid sutures in episiotomy repair. Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology of the British Commonwealth 81: 245-247
15. Mackrodt C, Gordon B, Fern E et al. 1998 The Ipswich childbirth study: 2. A randomised comparison of polyglactin 910 with chromic catgut for postpartum perineal repair. British Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 105: 441-445
16. Mahomed K, Grant A, Ashurst H et al. 1989 The Southmead perineal suture study: A randomized comparison of suture materials and suturing techniques for repair of perineal trauma. British Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 96: 1272-1280
17. Olah KS 1990 Episiotomy repair - suture material and short term morbidity. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 10: 503-505
18. Pocock SJ 1982 Statistical aspects of clinical trial design. Statistician 31: 1-18
19. Roberts AD, Hart DM 1983 Polyglycolic acid and catgut sutures, with and without oral proteolytic enzymes, in the healing of episiotomies. British Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 90: 650-653
20. Rogers RE 1974 Evaluation of post-episiorrhaphy pain: polyglycolic acid vs catgut sutures. Military Medicine 139: 102-104
21. Schulz KF 1995 Subverting randomization in controlled trials. Journal of the American Medical Association 274: 1456-1458
22. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Grimes DA et al. 1994 Assessing the quality of randomization from reports of controlled trials published in obstetrics and gynecology journals. JAMA 272: 125-128
23. Small R, Lumley J, Donohue L et al. 2000 Randomised controlled trial of midwife led debriefing to reduce maternal depression after operative childbirth. British Medical Journal 321: 1043-1047
24. Stewart DW, Buffington PJ, Wacksman J 1990 Suture material in bladder surgery: a comparison of polydioxanone, polyglactin, and chromic catgut. Journal of Urology 143: 1261-1263
25. Wikoff MD, Kuehl TJ, Cooney AT et al. 1992 Comparison of postpartum pain and healing with repair of perineal disruptions using chromic catgut or polyglycolic acid suture. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 166: 409