Serife Esra Cetinkaya1, Fulya Dokmeci, Omer Dai. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara University School of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey, esrascetinkaya@yahoo.com.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: To evaluate the relationship between pelvic organ prolapse (POP) staging and clinical findings, lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), sexual dysfunction, and quality of life (QoL) using validated questionnaires. METHODS: Women attending the urogynecology unit with LUTS and/or bulging (n = 388) were grouped according to the POP quantification (POPQ). LUTS, sexual dysfunction, and QoL were evaluated using the Urinary Distress Inventory-6 (UDI-6),the Overactive Bladder Awareness tool (OAB-V8), the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12), and the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire-7 (IIQ-7). Data regarding baseline characteristics, clinical findings, and scores of questionnaires were compared among the POP stages using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Pearson's and Spearman's correlation analyses were used to evaluate the correlation of POP staging with clinical findings, pelvic floor dysfunction related symptom severity, and QoL. RESULTS: According to the POPQ, patients were classified as: stage 0 (27.8 %), stage 1 (21.4%), stage 2 (38.9%), and stages 3 and 4 (11.8%). Irritative, stress, obstructive subscale scores of UDI-6 and physical, travel, emotional subscale scores of IIQ-7 were significantly different among POPQ stages. Weak correlations between POPQ staging and irritative, stress, obstructive subscale scores of UDI-6 (r = 0.198, r = 0.192, and r = 0.146 respectively), and physical, travel, social, emotional subscale scores of IIQ-7 (r = 0.223, r = 0.154, r = 120 and r = 0.171 respectively) were found (p < 0.05). Clinical findings (Q-tip and stress test positivity, post-void residual volumes) showed moderate to weak correlations with POPQ stages (r = 0.425, r = 0.117, r = 0.163 respectively; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The correlation of lower urinary tract dysfunction and POP staging was shown to be best represented by UDI-6 and IIQ-7.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: To evaluate the relationship between pelvic organ prolapse (POP) staging and clinical findings, lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), sexual dysfunction, and quality of life (QoL) using validated questionnaires. METHODS:Women attending the urogynecology unit with LUTS and/or bulging (n = 388) were grouped according to the POP quantification (POPQ). LUTS, sexual dysfunction, and QoL were evaluated using the Urinary Distress Inventory-6 (UDI-6),the Overactive Bladder Awareness tool (OAB-V8), the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12), and the Incontinence Impact Questionnaire-7 (IIQ-7). Data regarding baseline characteristics, clinical findings, and scores of questionnaires were compared among the POP stages using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Pearson's and Spearman's correlation analyses were used to evaluate the correlation of POP staging with clinical findings, pelvic floor dysfunction related symptom severity, and QoL. RESULTS: According to the POPQ, patients were classified as: stage 0 (27.8 %), stage 1 (21.4%), stage 2 (38.9%), and stages 3 and 4 (11.8%). Irritative, stress, obstructive subscale scores of UDI-6 and physical, travel, emotional subscale scores of IIQ-7 were significantly different among POPQ stages. Weak correlations between POPQ staging and irritative, stress, obstructive subscale scores of UDI-6 (r = 0.198, r = 0.192, and r = 0.146 respectively), and physical, travel, social, emotional subscale scores of IIQ-7 (r = 0.223, r = 0.154, r = 120 and r = 0.171 respectively) were found (p < 0.05). Clinical findings (Q-tip and stress test positivity, post-void residual volumes) showed moderate to weak correlations with POPQ stages (r = 0.425, r = 0.117, r = 0.163 respectively; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The correlation of lower urinary tract dysfunction and POP staging was shown to be best represented by UDI-6 and IIQ-7.
Authors: Chiara Ghetti; W Thomas Gregory; S Renee Edwards; Lesley N Otto; Amanda L Clark Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Jerry L Lowder; Elizabeth A Frankman; Chiara Ghetti; Lara J Burrows; Marijane A Krohn; Pamela Moalli; Halina Zyczynski Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2010-01-14 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Bernard T Haylen; Dirk de Ridder; Robert M Freeman; Steven E Swift; Bary Berghmans; Joseph Lee; Ash Monga; Eckhard Petri; Diaa E Rizk; Peter K Sand; Gabriel N Schaer Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2009-11-25 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: G Ghoniem; E Stanford; K Kenton; C Achtari; R Goldberg; T Mascarenhas; M Parekh; K Tamussino; S Tosson; G Lose; E Petri Journal: Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct Date: 2007-11-17
Authors: Gianluca Pellino; Lisa Ramage; Constantinos Simillis; Oliver Warren; Christos Kontovounisios; Emile Tan; Paris Tekkis Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2017-03-15 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Greta Lisa Carlin; Klaus Bodner; Oliver Kimberger; Peter Haslinger; Christian Schneeberger; Reinhard Horvat; Heinz Kölbl; Wolfgang Umek; Barbara Bodner-Adler Journal: Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X Date: 2020-05-11