Table 6

Assessing sustainability: comparison of group A clusters in phase 3 with group B (late intervention) clusters in phase 2
Mean Difference (95% CI)a,b P-valuec
Sutures removed, % 1.9% (−0.8% to 8.1%) 0.18
Perineal wound infection since birth, % 1.0% (−4.0% to 6.1%) 0.66
Use of continuous non-locking suturing technique for vaginal wall, % −3.5% (−17.2% to 10.1%) 0.57
Use of continuous non-locking suturing technique for muscle layer, % 5.1% (−9.3% to 19.5%) 0.44
Use of subcuticular suturing technique for perineal skin, % −5.8% (−17.8% to 6.1%) 0.30
Use of evidence-based management technique for all layers, %d 1.7% (−16.0% to 19.4%) 0.84
Use of rapidly absorbable polyglactin suture, % −9.4% (−32.4% to 13.7%) 0.38
Women who received post-natal leaflet, % −34.5% (−54.2% to −14.8%) 0.003

aMean difference = mean in B clusters – mean in A clusters. Negative mean differences indicate values were on average higher in the group A (early intervention) clusters.

bOne cluster had no data at phase 3, and so this cluster and its pair were excluded (9 degrees of freedom).

cPaired t-test.

dFor this variable one additional cluster had no data, and so this cluster and its pair were excluded (8 degrees of freedom).

Ismail et al.

Ismail et al. BMC Medicine 2013 11:209   doi:10.1186/1741-7015-11-209

Open Data