Literature DB >> 16598414

Validation of a simplified technique for using the POPQ pelvic organ prolapse classification system.

Steven Swift1, Sarah Morris, Vikki McKinnie, Robert Freeman, Eckhard Petri, Richard J Scotti, Peter Dwyer.   

Abstract

Our objective was to determine the inter-examiner agreement of a simplified pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POPQ) exam and to assess its correlation with the standard POPQ exam. This study consists of two parts; both were performed in a prospective, randomized, blinded fashion on women presenting with complaints attributed to pelvic organ support defects. The first study was done to determine the inter-examiner reliability of a simplified POPQ exam. The simplified POPQ exam is based on the POPQ with similar ordinal staging but with only four points measured instead of nine. Forty-eight women underwent exams by five different investigators. The order of exams was randomized and the examiners were blinded to the results of each other's findings. The results of these two exams were compared using weighted kappa statistics. The second part of the study was done to determine the inter-system agreement between the simplified vs standard POPQ exam. A group of 49 women were examined by four different investigators: one using the simplified and the other using standard POPQ exams. The order of the exams was randomized and the examiners were blinded to the results of each other's exam. Kendall's tau-b statistics were used to determine the inter-system agreement. For the inter-examiner reliability of the POPQ exam, the average age was 60+/-13 years. The weighted kappa statistics for the inter-examiner reliability of the simplified prolapse classification system were 0.86 for the overall stage, 0.89 and 0.86 for the anterior and posterior vaginal walls, respectively, 0.82 for the apex/cuff, and 0.72 for the cervix. All demonstrate significant agreement. For the inter-system association between the simplified POPQ and standard POPQ, the average age was 61+/-15 year. The Kendall's tau-b value for overall stage was 0.90, 0.83, and 0.87 for the anterior and posterior walls respectively, and 0.78 for the cuff/apex and 0.98 for the cervix. There is good inter-examiner agreement of a simplified POPQ classification system and it appears to have good inter-system association with the POPQ.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16598414     DOI: 10.1007/s00192-006-0076-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct


  13 in total

1.  Adoption of the pelvic organ prolapse quantification system in peer-reviewed literature.

Authors:  Tristi W Muir; Kevin J Stepp; Matthew D Barber
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  The conflict in nomenclature for descensus uteri.

Authors:  E A FRIEDMAN; W A LITTLE
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1961-04       Impact factor: 8.661

3.  The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction.

Authors:  R C Bump; A Mattiasson; K Bø; L P Brubaker; J O DeLancey; P Klarskov; B L Shull; A R Smith
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 8.661

4.  Is the pelvic organ prolapse quantification system (POPQ) being used? A survey of members of the International Continence Society (ICS) and the American Urogynecologic Society (AUGS).

Authors:  W Auwad; R M Freeman; S Swift
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2004-05-18

5.  Genesis of the vaginal profile: a correlated classification of vaginal relaxation.

Authors:  W F Baden; T A Walker
Journal:  Clin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1972-12       Impact factor: 2.190

6.  Physical diagnosis in the evaluation of vaginal relaxation.

Authors:  W F Baden; T A Walker
Journal:  Clin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1972-12       Impact factor: 2.190

7.  Interobserver and intraobserver reliability of the proposed International Continence Society, Society of Gynecologic Surgeons, and American Urogynecologic Society pelvic organ prolapse classification system.

Authors:  A F Hall; J P Theofrastous; G W Cundiff; R L Harris; L F Hamilton; S E Swift; R C Bump
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 8.661

8.  The distribution of pelvic organ support in a population of female subjects seen for routine gynecologic health care.

Authors:  S E Swift
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 8.661

9.  Interobserver variation in the assessment of pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  W H Kobak; K Rosenberger; M D Walters
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  1996

10.  Pelvic Organ Support Study (POSST): the distribution, clinical definition, and epidemiologic condition of pelvic organ support defects.

Authors:  Steven Swift; Patrick Woodman; Amy O'Boyle; Margie Kahn; Michael Valley; Deirdre Bland; Wei Wang; Joe Schaffer
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 8.661

View more
  32 in total

1.  Center-by-center results of a multicenter prospective trial to determine the inter-observer correlation of the simplified POP-Q in describing pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  N Lemos; J E Korte; M Iskander; R Freeman; A Arunkalaivanan; D Rizk; M Halaska; C Medina; J C Conceição; M Parekh; A Martan; O Sorinola; E Wlazlak; Gamal Ghoniem; S Swift
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2011-11-15       Impact factor: 2.894

2.  "Eyeball" POP-Q examination: shortcut or valid assessment tool?

Authors:  Deborah R Karp; Thais V Peterson; Marjorie Jean-Michel; Roger Lefevre; G Willy Davila; Vivian C Aguilar
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2010-05-04       Impact factor: 2.894

3.  The inter-system association between the simplified pelvic organ prolapse quantification system (S-POP) and the standard pelvic organ prolapse quantification system (POPQ) in describing pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors:  Jittima Manonai; Lone Mouritsen; Paulo Palma; Oscar Contreras-Ortiz; Jeffrey E Korte; Steven Swift
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2010-10-09       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) / International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic organ prolapse (POP).

Authors:  Bernard T Haylen; Christopher F Maher; Matthew D Barber; Sérgio Camargo; Vani Dandolu; Alex Digesu; Howard B Goldman; Martin Huser; Alfredo L Milani; Paul A Moran; Gabriel N Schaer; Mariëlla I J Withagen
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 2.894

5.  Validation of the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification Index (POP-Q-I): a novel interpretation of the POP-Q system for optimization of POP research.

Authors:  Nucélio Luiz de Barros Moreira Lemos; Antonio Pedro Flores Auge; Jacqueline Leme Lunardelli; Silvia da Silva Carramão; Ana Luiza Antunes Faria; Tsutomu Aoki
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2008-01-24

Review 6.  Use of pelvic organ prolapse staging systems in published articles of selected specialized journals.

Authors:  Alejandro Daniel Treszezamsky; Lauren Rascoff; Azin Shahryarinejad; Michael D Vardy
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2010-01-06       Impact factor: 2.894

7.  Multicenter inter-examiner agreement trial for the validation of simplified POPQ system.

Authors:  Mitesh Parekh; Steven Swift; Nucelio Lemos; Mohsen Iskander; Bob Freeman; A S Arunkalaivanan; Alois Martan; Olanrewaju Sorinola; Diaa Rizk; Michael Halaska; Grzegorz Surkont; Carlos Medina; Jose Carlos Conceicao; Jeffrey E Korte
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2011-03-23       Impact factor: 2.894

8.  High uterosacral vault suspension vs Sacrocolpopexy for treating apical defects: a randomized controlled trial with twelve months follow-up.

Authors:  C Rondini; H Braun; J Alvarez; M J Urzúa; R Villegas; C Wenzel; C Descouvieres
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2015-04-25       Impact factor: 2.894

9.  Comparative study to evaluate the intersystem association and reliability between standard pelvic organ prolapse quantification system and simplified pelvic organ prolapse scoring system.

Authors:  Nivedita Raizada; Pratima Mittal; Jyotsna Suri; Anurag Puri; Vivek Sharma
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2014-03-29

10.  Inter-observer reliability of digital vaginal examination using a four-grade scale in different patient positions.

Authors:  G Alessandro Digesu; Vik Khullar; Linda Cardozo; Dudley Robinson
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2008-05-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.