Does the choice of pelvic organ prolapse treatment influence subjective pelvic-floor related quality of life?
The relationship between pelvic organ prolapse (POP) treatment and subjective pelvic-floor related quality of life (QoL) was examined. 130 postmenopausal women with symptomatic POP were included: 45 % (59/130) were treated conservatively with pessary and 55 % (71/130) underwent pelvic floor surgery....
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology 2021-04, Vol.259, p.161-166 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 166 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | |
| container_start_page | 161 |
| container_title | European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology |
| container_volume | 259 |
| creator | Carlin, Greta L. Morgenbesser, Raffaela Kimberger, Oliver Umek, Wolfgang Bodner, Klaus Bodner-Adler, Barbara |
| description | The relationship between pelvic organ prolapse (POP) treatment and subjective pelvic-floor related quality of life (QoL) was examined.
130 postmenopausal women with symptomatic POP were included: 45 % (59/130) were treated conservatively with pessary and 55 % (71/130) underwent pelvic floor surgery. All participants answered the validated German pelvic floor questionnaire at the time of baseline examination, as well as three months later.
Our results demonstrated a significant improvement regarding mean score in the domains “prolapse” (p = 0.001) and “sexual function” (p = 0.001) three months after prolapse surgery, whereas in the pessary group only the score in the “prolapse” domain improved (p < 0.001). When comparing the two treatment arms after three months, patients reported a significant advancement regarding their “sexual function” domain in the surgery group (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, univariate analysis revealed a significant positive correlation between “prolapse” domain score (correlation coefficient = 0.0001) as well as “bladder” domain score (correlation coefficient |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.02.018 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2498990433</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S030121152100097X</els_id><sourcerecordid>2498990433</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c362t-5728f4602ef9364815f178a7ea5ea1bd33de1515b5d01bbe3234648e85a8d39f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kLlOxDAQhi0EguV4A4Rc0iT4iHM0ILScEhIN1JaTjMGREy-2sxJvj1e7UDLNNN8_x4fQOSU5JbS8GnIY3Idvc0YYzQnLCa330ILWFcuqUhT7aEE4oRmjVByh4xAGkorz5hAdcV5WFa_YAo13DgKOn4C7T2c6wE7jFdi16bDzH2rCK--sWgXA0YOKI0wRm0nbGaYEh7kdoItmDbtQpq1zHnuwKkKPv2ZlTfzeDLVGw80pOtDKBjjb9RP0_nD_tnzKXl4fn5e3L1nHSxYzUbFaFyVhoBteFjUVmla1qkAJULTtOe-BCipa0RPatsAZLxIGtVB1zxvNT9Dldm66_muGEOVoQgfWqgncHCQrmrppSMF5Qost2nkXggctV96Myn9LSuRGtBzkVrTciJaEySQ6xS52G-Z2hP4v9Gs2AddbANKfawNehs5spPXGJ2Wyd-b_DT-dW5Hf</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2498990433</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Does the choice of pelvic organ prolapse treatment influence subjective pelvic-floor related quality of life?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Carlin, Greta L. ; Morgenbesser, Raffaela ; Kimberger, Oliver ; Umek, Wolfgang ; Bodner, Klaus ; Bodner-Adler, Barbara</creator><creatorcontrib>Carlin, Greta L. ; Morgenbesser, Raffaela ; Kimberger, Oliver ; Umek, Wolfgang ; Bodner, Klaus ; Bodner-Adler, Barbara</creatorcontrib><description>The relationship between pelvic organ prolapse (POP) treatment and subjective pelvic-floor related quality of life (QoL) was examined.
130 postmenopausal women with symptomatic POP were included: 45 % (59/130) were treated conservatively with pessary and 55 % (71/130) underwent pelvic floor surgery. All participants answered the validated German pelvic floor questionnaire at the time of baseline examination, as well as three months later.
Our results demonstrated a significant improvement regarding mean score in the domains “prolapse” (p = 0.001) and “sexual function” (p = 0.001) three months after prolapse surgery, whereas in the pessary group only the score in the “prolapse” domain improved (p < 0.001). When comparing the two treatment arms after three months, patients reported a significant advancement regarding their “sexual function” domain in the surgery group (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, univariate analysis revealed a significant positive correlation between “prolapse” domain score (correlation coefficient = 0.0001) as well as “bladder” domain score (correlation coefficient <0.001) and POP-Q stage. Additionally, a significant negative correlation between “sexual function” domain score and POP-Q stage was found (correlation coefficient = 0.0001).
Our results revealed that three months after prolapse surgery, pelvic-floor related QoL showed significant improvement in the domain “sexual function” compared to three months pessary treatment. Besides, advanced prolapse stage correlated with higher symptom burden and worse sexual function.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0301-2115</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-7654</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.02.018</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33677372</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Ireland: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Female ; Health related quality of life ; Humans ; Pelvic Floor ; Pelvic floor questionnaire ; Pelvic organ prolapse ; Pelvic Organ Prolapse - surgery ; Pessaries ; Postmenopausal ; Quality of Life ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology, 2021-04, Vol.259, p.161-166</ispartof><rights>2021 Elsevier B.V.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c362t-5728f4602ef9364815f178a7ea5ea1bd33de1515b5d01bbe3234648e85a8d39f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c362t-5728f4602ef9364815f178a7ea5ea1bd33de1515b5d01bbe3234648e85a8d39f3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9766-1360 ; 0000-0003-1710-7712</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.02.018$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33677372$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Carlin, Greta L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morgenbesser, Raffaela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kimberger, Oliver</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Umek, Wolfgang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bodner, Klaus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bodner-Adler, Barbara</creatorcontrib><title>Does the choice of pelvic organ prolapse treatment influence subjective pelvic-floor related quality of life?</title><title>European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology</title><addtitle>Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol</addtitle><description>The relationship between pelvic organ prolapse (POP) treatment and subjective pelvic-floor related quality of life (QoL) was examined.
130 postmenopausal women with symptomatic POP were included: 45 % (59/130) were treated conservatively with pessary and 55 % (71/130) underwent pelvic floor surgery. All participants answered the validated German pelvic floor questionnaire at the time of baseline examination, as well as three months later.
Our results demonstrated a significant improvement regarding mean score in the domains “prolapse” (p = 0.001) and “sexual function” (p = 0.001) three months after prolapse surgery, whereas in the pessary group only the score in the “prolapse” domain improved (p < 0.001). When comparing the two treatment arms after three months, patients reported a significant advancement regarding their “sexual function” domain in the surgery group (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, univariate analysis revealed a significant positive correlation between “prolapse” domain score (correlation coefficient = 0.0001) as well as “bladder” domain score (correlation coefficient <0.001) and POP-Q stage. Additionally, a significant negative correlation between “sexual function” domain score and POP-Q stage was found (correlation coefficient = 0.0001).
Our results revealed that three months after prolapse surgery, pelvic-floor related QoL showed significant improvement in the domain “sexual function” compared to three months pessary treatment. Besides, advanced prolapse stage correlated with higher symptom burden and worse sexual function.</description><subject>Female</subject><subject>Health related quality of life</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Pelvic Floor</subject><subject>Pelvic floor questionnaire</subject><subject>Pelvic organ prolapse</subject><subject>Pelvic Organ Prolapse - surgery</subject><subject>Pessaries</subject><subject>Postmenopausal</subject><subject>Quality of Life</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>0301-2115</issn><issn>1872-7654</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kLlOxDAQhi0EguV4A4Rc0iT4iHM0ILScEhIN1JaTjMGREy-2sxJvj1e7UDLNNN8_x4fQOSU5JbS8GnIY3Idvc0YYzQnLCa330ILWFcuqUhT7aEE4oRmjVByh4xAGkorz5hAdcV5WFa_YAo13DgKOn4C7T2c6wE7jFdi16bDzH2rCK--sWgXA0YOKI0wRm0nbGaYEh7kdoItmDbtQpq1zHnuwKkKPv2ZlTfzeDLVGw80pOtDKBjjb9RP0_nD_tnzKXl4fn5e3L1nHSxYzUbFaFyVhoBteFjUVmla1qkAJULTtOe-BCipa0RPatsAZLxIGtVB1zxvNT9Dldm66_muGEOVoQgfWqgncHCQrmrppSMF5Qost2nkXggctV96Myn9LSuRGtBzkVrTciJaEySQ6xS52G-Z2hP4v9Gs2AddbANKfawNehs5spPXGJ2Wyd-b_DT-dW5Hf</recordid><startdate>202104</startdate><enddate>202104</enddate><creator>Carlin, Greta L.</creator><creator>Morgenbesser, Raffaela</creator><creator>Kimberger, Oliver</creator><creator>Umek, Wolfgang</creator><creator>Bodner, Klaus</creator><creator>Bodner-Adler, Barbara</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9766-1360</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1710-7712</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202104</creationdate><title>Does the choice of pelvic organ prolapse treatment influence subjective pelvic-floor related quality of life?</title><author>Carlin, Greta L. ; Morgenbesser, Raffaela ; Kimberger, Oliver ; Umek, Wolfgang ; Bodner, Klaus ; Bodner-Adler, Barbara</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c362t-5728f4602ef9364815f178a7ea5ea1bd33de1515b5d01bbe3234648e85a8d39f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Female</topic><topic>Health related quality of life</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Pelvic Floor</topic><topic>Pelvic floor questionnaire</topic><topic>Pelvic organ prolapse</topic><topic>Pelvic Organ Prolapse - surgery</topic><topic>Pessaries</topic><topic>Postmenopausal</topic><topic>Quality of Life</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Carlin, Greta L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Morgenbesser, Raffaela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kimberger, Oliver</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Umek, Wolfgang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bodner, Klaus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bodner-Adler, Barbara</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Carlin, Greta L.</au><au>Morgenbesser, Raffaela</au><au>Kimberger, Oliver</au><au>Umek, Wolfgang</au><au>Bodner, Klaus</au><au>Bodner-Adler, Barbara</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Does the choice of pelvic organ prolapse treatment influence subjective pelvic-floor related quality of life?</atitle><jtitle>European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology</jtitle><addtitle>Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol</addtitle><date>2021-04</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>259</volume><spage>161</spage><epage>166</epage><pages>161-166</pages><issn>0301-2115</issn><eissn>1872-7654</eissn><abstract>The relationship between pelvic organ prolapse (POP) treatment and subjective pelvic-floor related quality of life (QoL) was examined.
130 postmenopausal women with symptomatic POP were included: 45 % (59/130) were treated conservatively with pessary and 55 % (71/130) underwent pelvic floor surgery. All participants answered the validated German pelvic floor questionnaire at the time of baseline examination, as well as three months later.
Our results demonstrated a significant improvement regarding mean score in the domains “prolapse” (p = 0.001) and “sexual function” (p = 0.001) three months after prolapse surgery, whereas in the pessary group only the score in the “prolapse” domain improved (p < 0.001). When comparing the two treatment arms after three months, patients reported a significant advancement regarding their “sexual function” domain in the surgery group (p < 0.0001). Furthermore, univariate analysis revealed a significant positive correlation between “prolapse” domain score (correlation coefficient = 0.0001) as well as “bladder” domain score (correlation coefficient <0.001) and POP-Q stage. Additionally, a significant negative correlation between “sexual function” domain score and POP-Q stage was found (correlation coefficient = 0.0001).
Our results revealed that three months after prolapse surgery, pelvic-floor related QoL showed significant improvement in the domain “sexual function” compared to three months pessary treatment. Besides, advanced prolapse stage correlated with higher symptom burden and worse sexual function.</abstract><cop>Ireland</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>33677372</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.02.018</doi><tpages>6</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9766-1360</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1710-7712</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0301-2115 |
| ispartof | European journal of obstetrics & gynecology and reproductive biology, 2021-04, Vol.259, p.161-166 |
| issn | 0301-2115 1872-7654 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2498990433 |
| source | MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
| subjects | Female Health related quality of life Humans Pelvic Floor Pelvic floor questionnaire Pelvic organ prolapse Pelvic Organ Prolapse - surgery Pessaries Postmenopausal Quality of Life Surveys and Questionnaires Treatment Outcome |
| title | Does the choice of pelvic organ prolapse treatment influence subjective pelvic-floor related quality of life? |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T17%3A28%3A30IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Does%20the%20choice%20of%20pelvic%20organ%20prolapse%20treatment%20influence%20subjective%20pelvic-floor%20related%20quality%20of%20life?&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20obstetrics%20&%20gynecology%20and%20reproductive%20biology&rft.au=Carlin,%20Greta%20L.&rft.date=2021-04&rft.volume=259&rft.spage=161&rft.epage=166&rft.pages=161-166&rft.issn=0301-2115&rft.eissn=1872-7654&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.02.018&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2498990433%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2498990433&rft_id=info:pmid/33677372&rft_els_id=S030121152100097X&rfr_iscdi=true |