干旱区生态环境知识资源中心

Introduction and hypothesis Clinical quality improvement relies on accurate understanding of current practice. We performed a cross-sectional national survey of certified nurse-midwives (CNMs) assessing classification and identification of obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASI) and other delivery lacerations. We hypothesized laceration diagnoses are frequently inaccurate, and delivery records for obstetric lacerations may be of questionable quality. Methods We emailed 6909 American College of Nurse Midwives members an internet-based survey link. Of respondents, we included clinically active CNMs who perform at least one delivery per month. We evaluated laceration knowledge and application using standard descriptive text and images and asked about processes for recording lacerations in the delivery record. Results We received 1070 (15.5%) completed surveys and 832 (77.8%) met inclusion criteria. Over 50% characterized their OASI training and ability to identify OASI as good/excellent. Most (79%) had never attended education review on OASI. The overall accuracy for classification and identification of perineal lacerations ranged from 49 to 99%. Non-perineal lacerations were frequently categorized using the perineal/OASI system. Half of respondents (51%) document their deliveries in an electronic medical record but a quarter (28%) are not personally responsible for approving delivery data. Younger participants without a doctoral degree, with self-assessed good/excellent laceration training, and caring for < 50% publicly insured patients had higher accuracy for laceration identification and diagnosis. Conclusions We found high rates of inaccurate laceration diagnosis and inappropriate application of the perineal OASI degree system, suggesting education and training are needed. Clinical studies that rely on delivery diagnosis of OASI may not be reliable.