Delivery outcome: other
Study	Outcome measure	PFMT data	Control data	Difference
PFMT versus no control
Stothers 2002	Type of delivery			73.3% vaginal, 26.7% caesarean; not reported per group
PFMT versus usual care
Gaier 2010	Number with episiotomy	2 of 65	6 of 62	Relative risk 0.32 (95% CI 0.07 to 1.52)
	Perineal trauma	0.5%	4.2%	Unable to calculate
Reilly 2002	Type of delivery	78 normal vaginal, 13 ventouse, 8 forceps, n = 120	72 normal vaginal, 22 ventouse, 2 forceps, n = 110	Relative risk for normal vaginal delivery 0.99 (95% CI 0.82 to 1.20) Relative risk for assisted vaginal delivery 0.80 (95% CI 0.47 to 1.36)
PFMT versus unspecified control
Barakat 2011	Type of delivery	20 normal vaginal, 7 assisted vaginal, n = 34	18 normal vaginal, 5 assisted vaginal, n = 33	Relative risk for normal vaginal delivery 1.08 (95% CI 0.71 to 1.64) Relative risk for assisted vaginal delivery 1.36 (95% CI 0.48 to 3.86)
	Perineal trauma	22 intact perineum, 6 grade 1 tear, 5 grade 2 tear, 1 grade 3 tear, n = 34	19 intact perineum, 6 grade 1 tear, 8 grade 2 tear, 0 grade 3 tear, n = 33	Relative risk for perineal tear 0.83 (95% CI 0.45 to 1.52)