Table 1.
Characteristics | Delivered in health facility (532) | Delivered at home (923) | All deliveries (1455) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
n (%) | n (%) | n (%) | ||
Ethnic group | Aboriginal | 362 (69) | 876 (96) | 1238 (86) |
Mestizo | 161 (31) | 36 (4) | 197 (14) | |
Age at delivery | 14 to 19 years old | 66 (12) | 111 (12) | 177 (12) |
20 to 49 years old | 466 (88) | 811 (88) | 1277 (88) | |
Able to read Spanish | Yes | 365 (69) | 330 (36) | 695 (48) |
No | 166 (31) | 588 (64) | 754 (52) | |
Civil status | Married/co-habiting | 502 (95) | 888 (97) | 1390 (97) |
Single | 26 (5) | 24 (3) | 50 (3) | |
Parity | Primipara | 172 (32) | 138 (15) | 310 (21) |
Multipara | 358 (68) | 782 (85) | 1140 (79) | |
Who attended delivery | Physician | 460 (86) | 20 (2) | 480 (33) |
Nurse | 59 (11) | 17 (2) | 76 (5) | |
Health promotor | 8 (2) | – | 8 (0.5) | |
Traditional midwife | – | 643 (70) | 643 (44) | |
Relative | – | 151 (16) | 151 (10) | |
Nobody | – | 86 (10) | 86 (6) | |
Position during labour and delivery | Upright/semi-upright | 40 (8) | 760 (83) | 800 (56) |
Horizontal | 482 (92) | 152 (17) | 634 (44) | |
Reported perineal tear | Yes | 86 (17) | 104 (12) | 190 (14) |
No | 429 (83) | 793 (88) | 1222 (86) | |
Reported episiotomy | Yes | 171 (33) | 76a (9) | 247 (17) |
No | 354 (67) | 815 (91) | 1169 (83) | |
Reported perineal trauma (tear and/or episiotomy) | Yes | 196 (38) | 160 (18) | 356 (25) |
No | 315 (62) | 733 (82) | 1048 (75) | |
Reported infection of perineal wound | Yes | 28 (15) | 39 (24) | 67 (19) |
No | 165 (85) | 121 (76) | 286 (81) |
a76 women who delivered at home reported having an episiotomy, although 59 of them were assisted in their delivery by a traditional midwife and only 7 by a doctor or nurse. It is extremely unlikely that the traditional midwife performed an episiotomy, so probably these women in fact had a perineal tear which they reported as an episiotomy (18 of them also reported a perineal tear)