Randomised controlled trial of perineal shaving versus hair cutting in parturients on admission in labor. Perineal outcomes and maternal comfort related to the application of perineal warm packs in the second stage of labor: a randomized controlled trial.
To compare the maternal and neonatal outcomes between perineal shaving and hair cutting in parturients on admission in labor
                Five hundred pregnant women with labor pain and no medical or obstetric complications were selected at random on admission to be assigned into two groups at Rajavithi Hospital from 1st November 2001 to 28th February 2002. Forty two women were excluded because of cesarean section. Two hundred and twenty-seven cases received perineal hair cutting and 231 cases received perineal shaving.
                The gestational age at delivery was statistically significant difference between those receiving perineal hair cutting (39.4 week) comparing with those receiving perineal shaving (39.1 week) (p < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in 2 groups for puerperal morbidity, perineal wound infection and dehiscence. There were no neonatal infection and puerperal infection in both groups, where as both accoucheurs and perineorrhaphy operators were more satisfied the perineal shaving group than the cutting group (p < 0.001).
                Perineal shaving or hair cutting on admission in labor had no statistical significant difference effect on the perineal wound infection and dehiscence, neonatal infection, puerperal morbidity and infection. Perineal warm packs are widely used during childbirth in the belief that they reduce perineal trauma and increase comfort during late second stage of labor. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of applying warm packs to the perineum on perineal trauma and maternal comfort during the late second stage of labor.
                A randomized controlled trial was undertaken. In the late second stage of labor, nulliparous women (n = 717) giving birth were randomly allocated to have warm packs (n = 360) applied to their perineum or to receive standard care (n = 357). Standard care was defined as any second-stage practice carried out by midwives that did not include the application of warm packs to the perineum. Analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis, and the primary outcome measures were requirement for perineal suturing and maternal comfort.
                The difference in the number of women who required suturing after birth was not significant. Women in the warm pack group had significantly fewer third- and fourth-degree tears and they had significantly lower perineal pain scores when giving birth and on "day 1" and "day 2" after the birth compared with the standard care group. At 3 months, they were significantly less likely to have urinary incontinence compared with women in the standard care group.
                The application of perineal warm packs in late second stage does not reduce the likelihood of nulliparous women requiring perineal suturing but significantly reduces third- and fourth-degree lacerations, pain during the birth and on days 1 and 2, and urinary incontinence. This simple, inexpensive practice should be incorporated into second stage labor care.
There is insufficient evidence to recommend perineal shaving for women on admission in labour.