Suelene Costa de Albuquerque Coelho1, Edilson Benedito de Castro1, Cássia Raquel Teatin Juliato2. 1. School of Medicine, University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, Brazil. 2. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Rua Alexander Fleming, 101, Cidade Universitária Zeferino Vaz, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil, 13083-881. cassia.raquel@gmail.com.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the impact of pessary use on the quality of life of women with pelvic organ prolapse, and to determine the satisfaction rate and rationale for discontinuation. METHODS: This review is recorded in the PROSPERO database under number CRD42015023384. The criteria for inclusion were observational study; cross section; cohort study; randomized controlled trial; study published in English, Portuguese, and Spanish; and study whose participants are women with female pelvic organ prolapse treated using a pessary. We did not include limitations on the year of publication. The criteria for exclusion included studies that did not include the topic, bibliographic or systematic reviews and articles that did not use validated questionnaires. The MeSH terms were "Pelvic Organ Prolapse AND Pessaries AND Quality of Life" OR "Pessary AND Quality of Life" OR "Pessaries". RESULTS: We found 89 articles. After the final analyses, seven articles were included. All articles associated pessary use with improved quality of life, and all used only validated questionnaires. Over half of the women continued using the pessary during the follow-up with acceptable levels of satisfaction. The main rationales for discontinuation were discomfort, pain in the area, and expulsion of the device. CONCLUSION: This systematic review demonstrates that the pessary can produce a positive effect on women's quality of life and can significantly improve sexual function and body perception.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the impact of pessary use on the quality of life of women with pelvic organ prolapse, and to determine the satisfaction rate and rationale for discontinuation. METHODS: This review is recorded in the PROSPERO database under number CRD42015023384. The criteria for inclusion were observational study; cross section; cohort study; randomized controlled trial; study published in English, Portuguese, and Spanish; and study whose participants are women with female pelvic organ prolapse treated using a pessary. We did not include limitations on the year of publication. The criteria for exclusion included studies that did not include the topic, bibliographic or systematic reviews and articles that did not use validated questionnaires. The MeSH terms were "Pelvic Organ Prolapse AND Pessaries AND Quality of Life" OR "Pessary AND Quality of Life" OR "Pessaries". RESULTS: We found 89 articles. After the final analyses, seven articles were included. All articles associated pessary use with improved quality of life, and all used only validated questionnaires. Over half of the women continued using the pessary during the follow-up with acceptable levels of satisfaction. The main rationales for discontinuation were discomfort, pain in the area, and expulsion of the device. CONCLUSION: This systematic review demonstrates that the pessary can produce a positive effect on women's quality of life and can significantly improve sexual function and body perception.
Entities:
Keywords:
Pelvic organ prolapse; Pessaries; Quality of life; Questionnaires; Sexual function
Authors: Jennifer M Maito; Zellisha A Quam; Ellen Craig; Kara A Danner; Rebecca G Rogers Journal: J Midwifery Womens Health Date: 2006 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.388
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: Jeffrey L Clemons; Vivian C Aguilar; Tara A Tillinghast; Neil D Jackson; Deborah L Myers Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Brian Hutton; Georgia Salanti; Deborah M Caldwell; Anna Chaimani; Christopher H Schmid; Chris Cameron; John P A Ioannidis; Sharon Straus; Kristian Thorlund; Jeroen P Jansen; Cynthia Mulrow; Ferrán Catalá-López; Peter C Gøtzsche; Kay Dickersin; Isabelle Boutron; Douglas G Altman; David Moher Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2015-06-02 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Danielle I Niigaki; Rebecca S P Silva; Maria Augusta Tezelli Bortolini; Fátima F Fitz; Rodrigo A Castro Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2022-03-14 Impact factor: 1.932
Authors: Nicole J Fregosi; Deslyn T G Hobson; Casey L Kinman; Jeremy T Gaskins; J Ryan Stewart; Kate V Meriwether Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2018 Mar/Apr Impact factor: 2.091