Resumo Objetivo Avaliar aceitação da telemedicina e determinar seus fatores associados em uma clínica de uroginecologia de um hospital público brasileiro. Métodos Trata-se de estudo transversal realizado entre junho e novembro de 2020. Foram recrutadas pacientes que tiveram seus atendimentos eletivos adiados devido à pandemia de doença do coronavírus 2019 (coronavirus disease 2019, COVID-19, em inglês). As variáveis consideradas para a aceitação da telemedicina foram: diagnóstico uroginecológico, idade, escolaridade, local de residência, acesso à internet, tipo de dispositivo, frequência do uso da internet, e uso de plataformas de redes sociais. As variáveis categóricas foras descritas na forma de suas frequências absoluta e relativa. A associação entre essas variáveis foi avaliada por meio do teste exato de Fisher e análises uni e multivariada, e a aceitação da telemedicina foi considerada a variável dependente. Resultados Um total de 225 pacientes foram listadas, e 182 concordaram em participar. A idade média das participantes foi de 59 anos; 81,3% delas tinham acesso à internet, e 87,3% aceitaram a telemedicina. Observaram-se associações estatisticamente significativas entre a aceitação e maior escolaridade (p< 0,01), acesso à internet (p< 0,01), uso diário da internet (p< 0,01), acesso por celular próprio (p< 0,01), e acesso da própria residência (p< 0,01). Nas análises uni e multivariada, somente alto nível de escolaridade esteve associado à aceitação da telemedicina (razão de probabilidades ajustada: 4,82; intervalo de confiança de 95% = 1,59–14,65). Conclusão A maioria das pacientes atendidas em um hospital público de um país em desenvolvimento concordaram com a telemedicina. Acesso à internet e nível de escolaridade foram fatores associados à aceitação da telemedicina nessa população.

Abstract Objective To evaluate the acceptance of telemedicine and determine its associated factors in an urogynecology outpatient clinic of a public hospital in Brazil. Methods The present was a cross-sectional study performed between June and November 2020. The included patients had their elective appointments postponed due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The variables considered regarding the acceptance of telemedicine were: urogynecologic diagnosis, age, level of schooling, place of residence, access to the internet, type of device used, frequency of internet use, and use of social media platforms. The categorical variables were described by their absolute and relative frequencies. The association among variables was evaluated through the Fisher exact test, and univariate and multivariate analyses, considering the acceptance of telemedicine as the dependent variable. Results A total of 225 patients were listed, and 182 agreed to participate. The mean age was 59 years old, 81.3% of the patients had access to the internet, and 87.3% of them accepted telemedicine. There were statistically significant associations regarding the acceptance of telemedicine and high levels of schooling (p< 0.01), internet access (p< 0.01), daily use of the internet (p< 0.01), access through personal mobile phone (p< 0.01), and access through the participant's own residence (p< 0.01). In the univariate and multivariate analyses, only high levels of schooling were associated with the acceptance of telemedicine (Adjusted odds ratio: 4.82; 95% confidence interval = 1.59–14.65). Conclusion Most of the urogynecology patients of a public hospital in a developing country accepted telemedicine. Internet access and level of schooling were the factors associated with the acceptance of telemedicine in urogynecology.

SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this study was to assess the associated factors for selective mediolateral episiotomy at a tertiary, academic hospital. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis between 2017 and 2019 was performed. The primary outcome was the prevalence of selective mediolateral episiotomy. Independent variables were maternal, intrapartum, and neonatal characteristics. A significance level of 5% was established, and univariate and multivariate analyses with logistic regression models were performed. RESULTS: From 2,761 vaginal deliveries eligible for inclusion during this period, the prevalence of selective mediolateral episiotomy was 18.7%. Univariate analysis has shown that non-white women were protective factors (OR=0.77 [0.63–0.96]; p=0.02) for episiotomy; primiparity (OR=2.61 [2.12–3.21]; p<0.01), number of vaginal examinations between 6–10 repetitions (OR=3.16 [2.48–4.01]; p<0.01) and 11–20 repetitions (OR=5.40 [3.69–7.90]; p<0.01), longer second stage duration (OR=1.01 [1.00–1.02]; p<0.01), and women with gestational age more than 37 weeks were risk factors. Multivariate analysis reported that second stage duration (AOR=1.01 [1.00–1.03]; p<0.01), primiparity (AOR=2.03 [1.34–3.06]; p<0.01), and number of vaginal examinations between 6–10 repetitions (AOR=2.36 [1.50–3.70]; p<0.01) and 11–20 repetitions (AOR=3.29 [1.74–6.20]; p<0.01) were remained as risk factors for selective mediolateral episiotomy. CONCLUSION: A higher number of vaginal examinations during labor (over six repetitions), longer duration of second stage labor, and primiparity were risk factors associated with selective mediolateral episiotomy.