Improving women’s experiences of perineal suturing: A pragmatic qualitative analysis of what is helpful and harmful

Published:February 22, 2022DOI:



      Perineal trauma requiring suturing is increasing, along with the associated physiological and psychological morbidities for women. Provider training appears to focus more on technical aspects rather than respectful, relational care for women. Studies exploring women’s experiences have identified that how women are cared for can significantly impact upon overall experiences.


      To identify areas of improvement to the perineal suturing process and provide robust recommendations for urgent change by investigating what aspects are most traumatic to women and which are most supportive.


      A pragmatic qualitative analysis of data generated from 15 in-depth interviews with women who were sutured following birth.


      Regardless of tear severity, what was identified as helpful included anything that made the process better by increasing feelings of trust and reassurance, and providing women with a sense of being seen and heard. Harmful experiences were identified as those that worsened the experience, by increasing feelings of fear and vulnerability and leaving women with a sense of being disregarded or disrespected.


      The study confirmed that how the suturing process is conducted can have a significant detrimental impact upon women’s short- and longer-term physical and psychological well-being.

      Implications for practice

      An improved experience for women is most likely with kind professionals who explain the process as it goes along, check-in regularly and validate how the women feel. Women prefer to be sutured by a known professional, only if this provider is also kind and respectful.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Women and Birth
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Steen M.
        • Diaz M.
        Perineal trauma: a women’s health and wellbeing issue.
        Br. J. Midwifery. 2018; 26: 574-584
        • Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care
        Third and Fourth Degree Perineal Tears Clinical Care Standard.
        Clinical Care Standards, 2021
        • Diaz M.P.
        • Simpson N.
        • Brown A.
        • Diorgu F.C.
        • Steen M.
        Effectiveness of structured education and training in perineal wound assessment and repair for midwives and midwifery students: a review of the literature.
        Eur. J. Midwifery. 2021; 5: 1-12
        • Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW)
        National Core Maternity Indicators-Instrumental Vaginal Birth.
        • Australian Institute of Health Welfare (AIHW)
        Australia’s Mothers and Babies.
        • Goh R.
        • Goh D.
        • Ellepola H.
        Perineal tears—a review.
        Aust. J. Gen. Pract. 2018; 47: 35-38
        • Jansson M.H.
        • Franzén K.
        • Hiyoshi A.
        • Tegerstedt G.
        • Dahlgren H.
        • Nilsson K.
        Risk factors for perineal and vaginal tears in primiparous women–the prospective POPRACT-cohort study.
        BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020; 20: 749
        • Fleming V.E.
        • Hagen S.
        • Niven C.
        Does perineal suturing make a difference? The SUNS trial.
        BJOG. 2003; 110: 684-689
        • Priddis H.S.
        • Schmied V.
        • Kettle C.
        • Sneddon A.
        • Dahlen H.G.
        “A patchwork of services”-caring for women who sustain severe perineal trauma in New South Wales-from the perspective of women and midwives.
        BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2014; 14: 236
        • Priddis H.
        • Schmied V.
        • Dahlen H.
        Women’s experiences following severe perineal trauma: a qualitative study.
        BMC Womens Health. 2014; 14: 32
        • Serrano Drozdowskyj E.
        • Gimeno Castro E.
        • Trigo López E.
        • Bárcenas Taland I.
        • Chiclana Actis C.
        Factors influencing couples’ sexuality in the puerperium: a systematic review.
        Sex. Med. Rev. 2020; 8: 38-47
        • Bick D.E.
        • Ismail K.M.
        • Macdonald S.
        • Thomas P.
        • Tohill S.
        • Kettle C.
        How good are we at implementing evidence to support the management of birth related perineal trauma? A UK wide survey of midwifery practice.
        BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2012; 12: 57
        • Salmon D.
        A feminist analysis of women’s experiences of perineal trauma in the immediate post-delivery period.
        Midwifery. 1999; 15: 247-256
        • Briscoe L.
        • Lavender T.
        • O’Brien E.
        • Campbell M.
        • McGowan L.
        A mixed methods study to explore women and clinician’s response to pain associated with suturing second degree perineal tears and episiotomies [PRAISE].
        Midwifery. 2015; 31: 464-472
        • Thompson S.
        • Walsh D.
        Women’s perceptions of perineal repair as an aspect of normal childbirth.
        Br. J. Midwifery. 2015; 23: 553-559
        • Priddis H.
        • Dahlen H.
        • Schmied V.
        Women’s experiences following severe perineal trauma: a meta-ethnographic synthesis.
        J. Adv. Nurs. 2013; 69: 748-759
        • Webb S.
        • Sherburn M.
        • Ismail K.M.K.
        Managing perineal trauma after childbirth.
        BMJ. 2014; 349: g6829
        • Crookall R.
        • Fowler G.
        • Wood C.
        • Slade P.
        A systematic mixed studies review of women’s experiences of perineal trauma sustained during childbirth.
        J. Adv. Nurs. 2018; 74: 2038-2052
        • Dunn A.B.
        • Paul S.
        • Ware L.Z.
        • Corwin E.J.
        Perineal injury during childbirth increases risk of postpartum depressive symptoms and inflammatory markers.
        J. Midwifery Womens Health. 2015; 60: 428-436
        • Dahlen H.G.
        • Homer C.S.
        What are the views of midwives in relation to perineal repair?.
        Women Birth. 2008; 21: 27-35
        • Creswell J.W.
        Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches.
        Sage Publications, California2003
        • Berger R.
        Now I see it, now I don’t: researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research.
        Qual. Res. 2015; 15: 219-234
        • Althubaiti A.
        Information bias in health research: definition, pitfalls, and adjustment methods.
        J. Multidiscip. Healthc. 2016; 9: 211-217
        • Gresham E.
        • Forder P.
        • Chojenta C.L.
        • Byles J.E.
        • Loxton D.J.
        • Hure A.J.
        Agreement between self-reported perinatal outcomes and administrative data in New South Wales, Australia.
        BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015; 15 (161–161)
        • Bradley E.
        • Curry L.
        • Devers K.
        Qualitative data analysis for health services research: developing taxonomy, themes, and theory.
        Health Serv. Res. 2007; 42: 1758-1772
        • McHugh M.C.
        Feminist qualitative research: toward transformation of science and society.
        Oxford Handbook of Qualitative Research. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, US2014: 137-164
        • DiCicco‐Bloom B.
        • Crabtree B.F.
        The qualitative research interview.
        Med. Educ. 2006; 40: 314-321
        • Bazeley P.
        Qualitative Data Analysis: Practical Strategies.
        Sage Publications, 2013
        • Crabtree B.F.
        • Miller W.L.
        Doing Qualitative Research.
        2nd ed. Sage Publications, 1999
        • Sandelowski M.
        What’s in a name? Qualitative description revisited.
        Res. Nurs. Health. 2010; 33: 77-84
        • Reed R.
        • Sharman R.
        • Inglis C.
        Women’s descriptions of childbirth trauma relating to care provider actions and interactions.
        BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017; 17 (21–21)
        • Menage D.
        • Bailey E.
        • Lees S.
        • Coad J.
        Women’s lived experience of compassionate midwifery: human and professional.
        Midwifery. 2020; 85 (102662–102662)
        • Trzeciak S.
        • Mazzarelli A.
        Compassionomics: The Revolutionary Scientific Evidence that Caring Makes a Difference.
        Studer Group, Routledge, Pensacola2019
        • Janssen S.M.
        • Lagro-Janssen A.L.
        Physician’s gender, communication style, patient preferences and patient satisfaction in gynecology and obstetrics: a systematic review.
        Patient Educ. Couns. 2012; 89: 221-226
        • Allen R.
        • Watt F.
        • Jansen B.
        • Coghlan E.
        • Nathan E.A.
        Minimising compassion fatigue in obstetrics/gynaecology doctors: exploring an intervention for an occupational hazard.
        Australas. Psychiatry. 2017; 25: 403-406
        • Ghetti C.
        • Chang J.
        • Gosman G.
        Burnout, psychological skills, and empathy: balint training in obstetrics and gynecology residents.
        J. Grad. Med. Educ. 2009; 1: 231-235
        • Suleiman-Martos N.
        • Albendín-García L.
        • Gómez-Urquiza J.L.
        • Vargas-Román K.
        • Ramirez-Baena L.
        • Ortega-Campos E.
        • et al.
        Prevalence and predictors of burnout in midwives: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Int. J. Environ. Res. 2020; 17: 641
        • Barrett G.
        • Pendry E.
        • Peacock J.
        • Victor C.
        • Thakar R.
        • Manyonda I.
        Women’s sexual health after childbirth.
        BJOG. 2000; 107: 186-195
        • Gommesen D.
        • Nøhr E.
        • Qvist N.
        • Rasch V.
        Obstetric perineal tears, sexual function and dyspareunia among primiparous women 12 months postpartum: a prospective cohort study.
        BMJ Open. 2019; 9e032368
        • McDonald E.
        • Woolhouse H.
        • Brown S.J.
        Consultation about sexual health issues in the year after childbirth: a cohort study.
        Birth. 2015; 42: 354-361
        • von Sydow K.
        Sexuality during pregnancy and after childbirth: a metacontent analysis of 59 studies.
        J. Psychosom. Res. 1999; 47: 27-49
        • ten Hoope-Bender P.
        Continuity of maternity carer for all women.
        Lancet. 2013; 382: 1685-1687
        • Sandall J.
        • Devane D.
        • Soltani H.
        • Hatem M.
        • Gates S.
        Improving quality and safety in maternity care: the contribution of midwife-led care.
        J. Midwifery Womens Health. 2010; 55: 255-261
        • Nutting P.A.
        • Goodwin M.A.
        • Flocke S.A.
        • Zyzanski S.J.
        • Stange K.C.
        Continuity of primary care: to whom does it matter and when?.
        Ann. Fam. Med. 2003; 1: 149-155
        • Sandall J.
        • Soltani H.
        • Gates S.
        • Shennan A.
        • Devane D.
        Midwife‐led continuity models versus other models of care for childbearing women.
        Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2016; 4
        • Perriman N.
        • Davis D.L.
        • Ferguson S.
        What women value in the midwifery continuity of care model: a systematic review with meta-synthesis.
        Midwifery. 2018; 62: 220-229
        • Perdok H.
        • Verhoeven C.J.
        • van Dillen J.
        • Schuitmaker T.J.
        • Hoogendoorn K.
        • Colli J.
        • et al.
        Continuity of care is an important and distinct aspect of childbirth experience: findings of a survey evaluating experienced continuity of care, experienced quality of care and women’s perception of labor.
        BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018; 18: 13
        • Delaney A.L.
        • Singleton G.
        Information and relationship functions of communication between pregnant women and their health care providers.
        Commun. Stud. 2020; 71: 800-822