**5. Findings**

189 surveys were returned, 97 (51,3%) from midwives and 71 (37,6%) from obstetricians. 11% did not state profession. 57% of respondents attend deliveries exclusively at the public health system, 19% at the private system and 14.3% in both (**Table 1**).

70% of participants were trained in episiotomy practice at their undergraduate schools and 69% at medical internships.

The majority of professionals assisted between 20 and 100 deliveries per year and 2,2% of them assisted 500 or more (**Figure 1**).

Regarding episiotomy criteria, there was no homogeneity in their practice, but it is clear that the majority do not perform this procedure as a sphincter injury prevention technique when risk conditions arise (**Table 2**).

When data is divided by groups, professionals who assist ≤100 deliveries/year had more incorrect answers concerning prevention of deep sphincter or perineal injuries vs. those assisting 100 or more deliveries (79.4%) p <0.05 (**Table 3**).


**Table 1.** *Affiliation.*

#### **Figure 1.**

*N° of deliveries attended by the respondents per year.*


### **Table 2.**

*Criteria for episiotomy utilization.*


*Source: Survey "Diagnosis and management of episiotomies" OASI Test chi2 p < 0.05. \*N = 183 respondents to both questions.*

#### **Table 3.**

*Quality of episiotomy performance/N° of deliveries per year.*

According to self-report questionnaire 28.4% of participants perform this procedure in a correct manner.

Routine rectal examination was performed by 53.3% of participants, in contrast 5.4% never practiced this type of digital exam when assessing perineal trauma (**Table 4**). This is an interesting figure considering that professionals assisting <100 deliveries per year performed a higher frequency of rectal examination but no significant difference was demonstrated between groups (**Table 5**).


#### **Table 4.**

*Rectal examination criteria.*


#### **Table 5.**

*Rectal examination/N° of deliveries.*
