Back

Episiotomy Practices and Associated Factors in Central Vietnam

Giang, H. T. N.; Duy, D. T. T.; Vu, T.-H. T.

2025-03-03 epidemiology
10.1101/2025.03.02.25323179 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionResearch on episiotomy practices in Vietnam is limited. This study aimed to describe episiotomy use and identify factors associated with its practice among vaginal births in Central Vietnam, following the implementation of restrictive episiotomy guidelines. MethodsWe used data from a hospital-based, retrospective study conducted at Danang Hospital for Women and Children from April 2015 to March 2016. The study included all singleton, full-term vaginal births. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the odds of episiotomy by selected neonatal or maternal factors. ResultsAmong 3,471 eligible singleton births, 2,770 mothers (79.8%) underwent an episiotomy. The episiotomy rate was significantly higher in first-time births (97.7%) compared to second or subsequent births (61.5%), p<0.001. Multivariable analyses showed that first-time births, higher birth weight, younger maternal age, a less physical active occupation, and a history of miscarriage were significantly associated with higher odds of episiotomy. For example, the odds of episiotomy in first-time births was 24.21 (95% CI: 17.13-34.22) times higher than in second or subsequent births, and the odds for mothers with a history of miscarriage was 1.34 (95%CI: 1.03-1.73) compared to those without. Stratified analysis showed that these associations persisted in multiparous women but were not observed in primiparous women. ConclusionThis study highlights a very high episiotomy rate among primiparous women in Central Vietnam, one year after the implementation of restrictive episiotomy guidelines, despite of other maternal or neonatal factors associated with episiotomy in multiparous women. Comprehensive research and targeted interventions are needed to reduce episiotomy rates, particularly among first-time mothers in Vietnam.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 6%
23.2%
2
Journal of Global Health
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.1%
3
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 1%
7.0%
4
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
20 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.0%
50% of probability mass above
5
BMJ Public Health
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.2%
6
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
7
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.9%
8
Archives of Public Health
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.9%
9
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.8%
10
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 56%
1.7%
11
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
60 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
12
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.7%
13
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 9%
1.7%
14
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.5%
15
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.4%
16
Placenta
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.3%
17
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
18
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
19
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
20
Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness
16 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
21
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.8%
22
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.7%
23
Eurosurveillance
80 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
24
Public Health
34 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
25
European Journal of Public Health
20 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
26
AIDS and Behavior
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.5%
27
Healthcare
16 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
28
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
32 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.5%