Ghanbari Z, Peivandi S, Pasikhani MD, Darabi F. Comparison of Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification and Simplified Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification Systems in Clinical Staging of Iranian Women with Pelvic Organ Prolapse.
Ethiop J Health Sci 2021;
30:921-928. [PMID:
33883837 PMCID:
PMC8047234 DOI:
10.4314/ejhs.v30i6.10]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/26/2023] Open
Abstract
Background
Pelvic organ prolapse is a common pelvic disorder among women. A standard staging system is needed to carefully evaluate the extent and severity of the disease, and initiate appropriate treatment. The aim of this study was to compare the two methods of standard and simplified pelvic organ prolapse quantification systems in clinical staging of Iranian women with pelvic organ prolapse.
Methods
This observational cross-sectional study was conducted on all women with complaints of seeing or feeling a vaginal lump or bulge and/or a dragging sensation who were presented to a pelvic floor disorders clinic of Imam Khomeini Hospital in Tehran, Iran, from October 2018 to June 2019. All patients were evaluated in terms of pelvic organ prolapse severity and staging using both instruments. Also, length of time needed to complete the questionnaires were calculated. After data collection, the results of pelvic organ prolapse staging and degree of agreement between two examiners were evaluated.
Results
A total of 120 women with mean age of 50.92±13.12 years were evaluated. It was shown that there is an almost perfect agreement (kappa coefficient > 0.8) between standard and simplified pelvic organ prolapse quantification systems in all the 3 compartments. Also, there was almost a twofold increase in the time needed to perform standard pelvic organ prolapse quantification (4.16±1.01 minutes) compared to performing simplified pelvic organ prolapse quantification (2.12±1.14 minutes) (p=0.03).
Conclusion
According to the results of this study, there is a substantial and almost perfect agreement between standard and simplified pelvic organ prolapse quantification systems in clinical staging of Iranian women with pelvic organ prolapse. It seems that using simplified pelvic organ prolapse quantification system is more applicable in clinical practice for staging of pelvic organ prolapse, with high reliability coefficient.
Collapse