Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 4, 2026
External Cephalic Version: Is it an Effective and Safe Procedure?
Published on: June 6, 2020
The use of episiotomy in a low-risk population in the Netherlands: a secondary analysis
A E Seijmonsbergen-Schermers1, C C Geerts, M Prins
1Department of Midwifery Science, AVAG and the EMGO Institute of Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Background:
To examine the episiotomy incidence and determinants and outcomes associated with its use in primary care midwifery practices.
Methods:
Secondary analysis of two prospective cohort studies (n = 3,404).
Results:
The episiotomy incidence was 10.8 percent (20.9% for nulliparous and 6.3% for parous women). Episiotomy was associated with prolonged second stage of labor (adj. OR 12.09 [95% CI 6.0-24.2] for nulliparous and adj. OR 2.79 [1.7-4.6] for parous women) and hospital birth (adj. OR 1.75 [1.2-2.5] for parous women). Compared with episiotomy, perineal tears were associated with a lower rate of postpartum hemorrhage in parous women (adj. OR 0.58 [0.4-0.9]). Fewer women with perineal tears reported perineal discomfort (adj. OR 0.35 [0.2-0.6] for nulliparous and adj. OR 0.22 [0.1-0.3] for parous women). Among nulliparous women episiotomy was performed most frequently for prolonged second stage of labor (38.8%) and among parous women for history of episiotomy or prevention of major perineal trauma (21.1%).
Conclusions:
The incidence of episiotomy is high compared with some low-risk settings in other Western countries. Episiotomy was associated with higher rates of adverse maternal outcomes. Restricted use of episiotomy is likely to be beneficial for women.
