Clinical Trial Details
— Status: Recruiting
Administrative data
NCT number |
NCT06143072 |
Other study ID # |
333989 |
Secondary ID |
|
Status |
Recruiting |
Phase |
|
First received |
|
Last updated |
|
Start date |
January 1, 2024 |
Est. completion date |
October 1, 2024 |
Study information
Verified date |
November 2023 |
Source |
London North West Healthcare NHS Trust |
Contact |
n/a |
Is FDA regulated |
No |
Health authority |
|
Study type |
Observational
|
Clinical Trial Summary
The aim of this study is to ascertain which pathways currently exist in relation to the
follow up of patients with obstetric anal sphincter injury related incontinence. This is
particularly important as afflicted individuals may not readily volunteer information about
their symptoms and struggles and need to be safeguarded by the presence of robust care
pathways that ensure adequate follow up and care provision.
As obstetric anal sphincter injuries have been associated with increased litigation rates
over the years, positive interventions towards patient care will help ameliorate the
financial burden that litigation carries on the National Health Service. It is noteworthy of
mention that perineal injury, in itself, may not be suggestive of negligent care and is a
recognized complication of vaginal delivery. However, a failure to adequately manage the
injury may carry medicolegal implications.
Description:
Historically, pregnancy and childbirth has been erroneously considered to be an innocuous
physiological event. However, vaginal delivery may be associated with perineal injury, a
common occurrence affecting up to 80% of women. Perineal injury is classified into four
categories, as per the Sultan classification:
Grade 1: involvement of perineal skin +/- vaginal mucosa Grade 2: involvement of perineal
muscles Grade 3a: <50% External Anal Sphincter (EAS) Grade 3b: >50% EAS Grade 3c: EAS +
Internal Anal Sphincter (IAS) Grade 4: Grade 3c + anorectal mucosa The latter two categories
are associated with considerable morbidity and are known as obstetric anal sphincter injuries
(OASIS). OASIS encompass grade 3 and 4 perineal tears and effect the integrity of the
anorectal sphincter complex, with or without involvement of the anorectal mucosa.
Such injuries may be associated with a myriad of devastating and stigmatizing sequelae,
including faecal and urinary incontinence, dyspareunia, rectovaginal fistulae, perineal pain
and pelvic organ prolapse, which in turn may have a negative impact on a woman's quality of
life and day-to-day living. Indeed, sustaining an Obstetric Anal Sphincter Injury (OASI) has
been associated with both physical and psychological sequelae.
Symptoms of urgency and urge faecal incontinence, are suggestive of damage to the external
anal sphincter, while symptoms of passive leakage are indicative of damage to the internal
anal sphincter. Not all women with OASIS are symptomatic. Symptomatic OASIS occurs in about
30-50% of women. It is important to note that the real incidence may be higher as it may very
well be underreported.
The incidence of OASIS in the UK is 2.9%. Although OASIS is uncommon, the rate of OASIS in
singleton, cephalic and first vaginal deliveries, has reportedly tripled from 1.8% to 5.9%
from 2000 to 2012. This may, however, be secondary to better detection of these injuries
following improvements in education, training and the utilization of a standardized
classification system for perineal tears. To address the rising OASI rates, the OASI care
bundle was introduced which primarily focused on interventions in the antenatal period to
reduce the incidence of OASIS. Prevention of OASIS, however, will not always be possible,
even with the best efforts of care. Therefore, focus should also be placed on the optimal
management of these patients' post-partum.
The RCOG (royal college of obstetricians and gynaecologists) guidance states that clinicians
should diagnose an OASI at the time of delivery by meticulous inspection of the perineum,
which should include a digital rectal examination. Referral to a colorectal specialist should
be considered in those who are symptomatic of incontinence. However, in the absence of a
standardised national pathway, the provision of healthcare appears to rely heavily on the
availability of resources, a clinician's discretion and ultimately a 'postcode lottery'.
Indeed, while some trusts may have the necessary provisions in place to support mothers with
OASIS, in other areas, women may be left to fend for themselves.
Moreover, the stigma and shame associated with sustaining such an injury may perpetuate the
difficulty in seeking medical attention, even in the most motivated patients, thereby
producing a population of silent sufferers, who are stuck in a pervasive pattern of shame,
embarrassment and inevitably, melancholy.
There may also be the erroneous belief among healthcare professionals, that these symptoms
would settle on their own and this may be communicated to the afflicted individual who may be
reassured by this information. Although 60-80% of women are asymptomatic at one year, some
remain symptomatic, with devastating consequences on their quality of life. Further, patients
with an asymptomatic injury ought to be counselled regarding the risk of incontinence in
later life, secondary to advancing age and hormonal influence on pelvic floor function as
well as the added impact of future deliveries. When discussing mode of delivery for future
pregnancies, it should be highlighted that although an elective caesarean section may protect
against an anal sphincter injury, it may not prevent pudendal neuropathy which may also
contribute to symptoms of incontinence.