International Urogynecology Journal

, Volume 30, Issue 3, pp 429–437 | Cite as

Prospective comparison of obstetric anal sphincter injury incidence between an Asian and Western hospital

  • Lucy J. Bates
  • Jerome Melon
  • Robin Turner
  • Symphorosa S. C. Chan
  • Emmanuel Karantanis
Original Article


Introduction and hypothesis

Obstetric anal sphincter injury (OASIS) rates are reported to be higher in Asian women living in Western countries than in those living in Asia, but the reasons for the differences remain unclear. The objectives of this study were for a single examiner to prospectively compare OASIS rates in primiparous Asian women in an Asian and Western birth unit and determine potential birth factors that may influence the possible difference in OASIS incidence.


This was a prospective observational study based in Hong Kong, China, and Sydney, Australia, involving primiparous women > 36 weeks gestation of Asian descent undergoing vaginal delivery. A single examiner recorded basic patient demographics, observed all the deliveries at both sites, noting birthing techniques, and then examined the women, including a rectal examination, to determine OASIS incidence.


Seventy births in Hong Kong and 66 in Sydney were studied. The incidence of OASIS was 34% in Sydney and 10% in Hong Kong (p = 0.001). Birthweight, epidural rate, body mass index, and instrumental delivery were higher in Sydney. Episiotomy rates were higher in Hong Kong (59.2% vs. 82.9%; p = 0.007). When comparing OASIS with no-OASIS, perineal length (OR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.76, p = 0.004) and birthweight (OR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.30, p = 0.039) were independent risk factors for OASIS.


The incidence of OASIS in Asian women is significantly higher in a Western than in an Asian setting. In Asian women, perineal length and birthweight can affect the risk of OASIS at the time of vaginal delivery.


Birthweight Episiotomy OASIS Perineal length Primiparous 



Body mass index


Epidural block


Gestational diabetes mellitus


Mediolateral episiotomy


Obstetric anal sphincter injuries



We acknowledge Prof. Tony Chung, who helped with the conception of the study and cooperation of both hospitals and helped provide funding. We thank CY Lai and all of the midwives who helped with the recruitment of patients at both sites. We also acknowledge Prof. Kate Moore who helped with editing the manuscript.


The study was funded by the OASIS Research Trust Fund (Sydney) and the Academic Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (Hong Kong).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest



  1. 1.
    Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Obstetric trauma. In: Health at a glance 2015: OECD indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2015.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Andrews V, Sultan AH, Thakar R, Jones PW. Occult anal sphincter injuries—myth or reality? BJOG. 2006;113(2):195–200. Scholar
  3. 3.
    Trinh AT, Khambalia A, Ampt A, Morris JM, Roberts CL. Episiotomy rate in Vietnamese-born women in Australia: support for a change in obstetric practice in Viet Nam. Bull World Health Organ. 2013;91(5):350–6. Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tung CW, Cheon WC, Tong WM, Leung HY. Incidence and risk factors of obstetric anal sphincter injuries after various modes of vaginal deliveries in Chinese women. Chin Med J. 2015;128(18):2420–5. Scholar
  5. 5.
    Reid AJ, Beggs AD, Sultan AH, Roos AM, Thakar R. Outcome of repair of obstetric anal sphincter injuries after three years. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2014;127(1):47–50. Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mous M, Muller SA, de Leeuw JW. Long-term effects of anal sphincter rupture during vaginal delivery: faecal incontinence and sexual complaints. BJOG. 2008;115(2):234–8. Scholar
  7. 7.
    Faltin DL, Boulvain M, Irion O, Bretones S, Stan C, Weil A. Diagnosis of anal sphincter tears by postpartum endosonography to predict fecal incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;95(5):643–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Burrell M, Dilgir S, Patton V, Parkin K, Karantanis E. Risk factors for obstetric anal sphincter injuries and postpartum anal and urinary incontinence: a case-control trial. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26(3):383–9. Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sentell T, Chang A, Cheng Y, Miyamura J. Maternal quality and safety outcomes for Asians and Pacific islanders in Hawai’i: an observational study from five years of statewide data. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014;14:298. Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ampt AJ, Ford JB, Roberts CL, Morris JM. Trends in obstetric anal sphincter injuries and associated risk factors for vaginal singleton term births in New South Wales 2001-2009. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;53(1):9–16. Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lai CY, Cheung HW, Hsi Lao TT, Lau TK, Leung TY. Is the policy of restrictive episiotomy generalisable? A prospective observational study. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2009;22(12):1116–21. Scholar
  12. 12.
    McPherson KC, Beggs AD, Sultan AH, Thakar R. Can the risk of obstetric anal sphincter injuries (OASIs) be predicted using a risk-scoring system? BMC Res Notes. 2014;7:471. Scholar
  13. 13.
    Laine K, Skjeldestad FE, Sandvik L, Staff AC. Prevalence and risk indicators for anal incontinence among pregnant women. ISRN Obstet Gynecol. 2013;2013:947572. Scholar
  14. 14.
    de Leeuw JW, de Wit C, Kuijken JP, Bruinse HW. Mediolateral episiotomy reduces the risk for anal sphincter injury during operative vaginal delivery. BJOG. 2008;115(1):104–8. Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hamilton EF, Smith S, Yang L, Warrick P, Ciampi A. Third- and fourth-degree perineal lacerations: defining high-risk clinical clusters. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011;204(4):309 e301-306. Scholar
  16. 16.
    Geller EJ, Robinson BL, Matthews CA, Celauro KP, Dunivan GC, Crane AK, et al. Perineal body length as a risk factor for ultrasound-diagnosed anal sphincter tear at first delivery. Int Urogynecol J. 2014;25(5):631–6. Scholar
  17. 17.
    Laine K, Skjeldestad FE, Sandvik L, Staff AC. Incidence of obstetric anal sphincter injuries after training to protect the perineum: cohort study. BMJ Open. 2012;2(5):e001649. Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kapoor DS, Thakar R, Sultan AH. Obstetric anal sphincter injuries: review of anatomical factors and modifiable second stage interventions. Int Urogynecol J. 2015;26:1725–34. Scholar
  19. 19.
    Verghese TS, Champaneria R, Kapoor DS, Latthe PM. Obstetric anal sphincter injuries after episiotomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(10):1459–67. Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cheung RY, Shek KL, Chan SS, Chung TK, Dietz HP. Pelvic floor muscle biometry and pelvic organ mobility in east Asian and Caucasian nulliparae. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;45(5):599–604. Scholar
  21. 21.
    National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Intrapartum care: care of healthy women and their babies during childbirth. NICE clinical guideline (CG190). 2014.
  22. 22.
    Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K, Brubaker LP, DeLancey JO, Klarskov P, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;175(1):10–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sultan AH, Monga AK. Anal and urinary incontinence in women with obstetric anal sphincter rupture. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;104(6):754–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    StataCorp. Stata statistical software: release 14. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP; 2015.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ramalingam K, Monga AK. Outcomes and follow-up after obstetric anal sphincter injuries. Int Urogynecol J. 2013;24(9):1495–500. Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sagedal LR. Who are we missing? Examining non-participants in “fit for delivery”, a randomized, controlled trial of a lifestyle intervention in pregnancy. Pregnancy Hypertens. 2014;4(3):237. Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Urogynecological Association 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.St George HospitalUniversity of New South WalesSydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Prince of Wales HospitalChinese University of Hong KongShatinHong Kong
  3. 3.Dean’s Office, Dunedin School of MedicineUniversity of OtagoDunedinNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations