Search tips
Search criteria 


Logo of cmajCMAJ Information for AuthorsCMAJ Home Page
CMAJ. 1995 September 15; 153(6): 769–779.
PMCID: PMC1487268

Physicians' beliefs and behaviour during a randomized controlled trial of episiotomy: consequences for women in their care.


OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether physicians' beliefs concerning episiotomy are related to their use of procedures and to differential outcomes in childbirth. DESIGN: Post-hoc cohort analysis of physicians and patients involved in a randomized controlled trial of episiotomy. SETTING: Two tertiary care hospitals and one community hospital in Montreal. PARTICIPANTS: Of the 703 women at low risk of medical or obstetric problems enrolled in the trial we studied 447 women (226 primiparous and 221 multiparous) attended by 43 physicians. Subjects attended by residents or nurses were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients: intact perineum v. perineal trauma, length of labour, procedures used (instrumental delivery, oxytocin augmentation of labour, cesarean section and episiotomy), position for birth, rate of and reasons for not assigning women to a study arm, postpartum perineal pain and satisfaction with the birth experience, physicians: beliefs concerning episiotomy. RESULTS: Women attended by physicians who viewed episiotomy very unfavorably were more likely than women attended by the other physicians to have an intact perineum (23% v. 11% to 13%, p < 0.05) and to experience less perineal trauma. The first stage of labour was 2.3 to 3.5 hours shorter for women attended by physicians who viewed episiotomy favourably than for women attended by physicians who viewed episiotomy very unfavorably (p < 0.05 to < 0.01), and the former physicians were more likely to use oxytocin augmentation of labour. Physicians who viewed episiotomy more favourably failed more often than those who viewed the procedure very unfavourably to assign patients to a study arm late in labour (odds ratio [OR] 1.88, p < 0.05), both overall and because they felt that "fetal distress" or cesarean section necessitated exclusion of the subject. They used the lithotomy position for birth more often (OR 3.94 to 4.55, p < 0.001), had difficulty limiting episiotomy in the restricted-use arm of the trial and diagnosed fetal distress and perineal inadequacy more often than the comparison groups. The patients of physicians who viewed episiotomy very favourably experienced more perineal pain (p < 0.01), and of those who viewed episiotomy favourably and very favourably experienced less satisfaction with the birth experience (p < 0.01) than the patients of physicians who viewed the procedure very unfavourably. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians with favourably views of episiotomy were more likely to use techniques to expedite labour, and their patients were more likely to have perineal trauma and to be less satisfied with the birth experience. This evidence that physician beliefs can influence patient outcomes has both clinical and research implications.

Full text

Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (3.2M), or click on a page image below to browse page by page. Links to PubMed are also available for Selected References.

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Klein MC, Gauthier RJ, Jorgensen SH, Robbins JM, Kaczorowski J, Johnson B, Corriveau M, Westreich R, Waghorn K, Gelfand MM, et al. Does episiotomy prevent perineal trauma and pelvic floor relaxation? Online J Curr Clin Trials. 1992 Jul 1;DOC:[6019 words–paragraphs]. [PubMed]
  • Klein MC, Gauthier RJ, Robbins JM, Kaczorowski J, Jorgensen SH, Franco ED, Johnson B, Waghorn K, Gelfand MM, Guralnick MS, et al. Relationship of episiotomy to perineal trauma and morbidity, sexual dysfunction, and pelvic floor relaxation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1994 Sep;171(3):591–598. [PubMed]
  • Sleep J, Grant A, Garcia J, Elbourne D, Spencer J, Chalmers I. West Berkshire perineal management trial. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1984 Sep 8;289(6445):587–590. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Taylor KM, Margolese RG, Soskolne CL. Physicians' reasons for not entering eligible patients in a randomized clinical trial of surgery for breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1984 May 24;310(21):1363–1367. [PubMed]
  • Taylor KM, Kelner M. Interpreting physician participation in randomized clinical trials: the Physician Orientation Profile. J Health Soc Behav. 1987 Dec;28(4):389–400. [PubMed]
  • Taylor KM, Shapiro M, Soskolne CL, Margolese RG. Physician response to informed consent regulations for randomized clinical trials. Cancer. 1987 Sep 15;60(6):1415–1422. [PubMed]
  • Spodick DH. The randomized controlled clinical trial. Scientific and ethical bases. Am J Med. 1982 Sep;73(3):420–425. [PubMed]
  • Carpenter MW, Soule D, Yates WT, Meeker CI. Practice environment is associated with obstetric decision making regarding abnormal labor. Obstet Gynecol. 1987 Oct;70(4):657–662. [PubMed]
  • Silbar EL. Factors related to the increasing cesarean section rates for cephalopelvic disproportion. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1986 May;154(5):1095–1098. [PubMed]
  • Goyert GL, Bottoms SF, Treadwell MC, Nehra PC. The physician factor in cesarean birth rates. N Engl J Med. 1989 Mar 16;320(11):706–709. [PubMed]
  • Berkowitz GS, Fiarman GS, Mojica MA, Bauman J, de Regt RH. Effect of physician characteristics on the cesarean birth rate. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1989 Jul;161(1):146–149. [PubMed]
  • Stafford RS. The impact of nonclinical factors on repeat cesarean section. JAMA. 1991 Jan 2;265(1):59–63. [PubMed]
  • Phillips RN, Thornton J, Gleicher N. Physician bias in cesarean sections. JAMA. 1982 Sep 3;248(9):1082–1084. [PubMed]
  • Guillemette J, Fraser WD. Differences between obstetricians in caesarean section rates and the management of labour. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1992 Feb;99(2):105–108. [PubMed]
  • Maheux B, Pineault R, Lambert J, Béland F, Berthiaume M. Factors influencing physicians' preventive practices. Am J Prev Med. 1989 Jul-Aug;5(4):201–206. [PubMed]
  • Brook RH, Kosecoff JB, Park RE, Chassin MR, Winslow CM, Hampton JR. Diagnosis and treatment of coronary disease: comparison of doctors' attitudes in the USA and the UK. Lancet. 1988 Apr 2;1(8588):750–753. [PubMed]
  • Harris JS. Why doctors do what they do: determinants of physician behavior. J Occup Med. 1990 Dec;32(12):1207–1220. [PubMed]
  • Thranov I, Kringelbach AM, Melchior E, Olsen O, Damsgaard MT. Postpartum symptoms. Episiotomy or tear at vaginal delivery. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 1990;69(1):11–15. [PubMed]
  • Graham SB, Catanzarite V, Bernstein J, Varela-Gittings F. A comparison of attitudes and practices of episiotomy among obstetrical practitioners in New Mexico. Soc Sci Med. 1990;31(2):191–201. [PubMed]
  • Wennberg J, Gittelsohn A. Variations in medical care among small areas. Sci Am. 1982 Apr;246(4):120–134. [PubMed]
  • Leape LL, Park RE, Solomon DH, Chassin MR, Kosecoff J, Brook RH. Relation between surgeons' practice volumes and geographic variation in the rate of carotid endarterectomy. N Engl J Med. 1989 Sep 7;321(10):653–657. [PubMed]
  • Lomas J, Anderson GM, Domnick-Pierre K, Vayda E, Enkin MW, Hannah WJ. Do practice guidelines guide practice? The effect of a consensus statement on the practice of physicians. N Engl J Med. 1989 Nov 9;321(19):1306–1311. [PubMed]
  • Lomas J, Enkin M, Anderson GM, Hannah WJ, Vayda E, Singer J. Opinion leaders vs audit and feedback to implement practice guidelines. Delivery after previous cesarean section. JAMA. 1991 May 1;265(17):2202–2207. [PubMed]
  • Soumerai SB, Avorn J. Principles of educational outreach ('academic detailing') to improve clinical decision making. JAMA. 1990 Jan 26;263(4):549–556. [PubMed]

Articles from CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association Journal are provided here courtesy of Canadian Medical Association