OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate whether women present adequate knowledge of the main pelvic floor disorders (PFDs) (urinary incontinence - UI, fecal incontinence - FI, and pelvic organ prolapse - POP). DATA SOURCES: A systematic review was performed in the MEDLINE, PEDro, CENTRAL, and Cochrane databases for publications from inception to April 2018. SELECTION OF STUDIES: A total of 3,125 studies were reviewed. Meta-analysis was not possible due to the heterogeneity of primary outcomes and the diversity of instruments for measuring knowledge. The quality of the articles included in the analysis was evaluated with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) adapted for cross-sectional studies. DATA COLLECTION: Two authors performed data extraction into a standardized spreadsheet. DATA SYNTHESIS: Nineteen studies were included, comprising 11,512 women. About the methodological quality (NOS), most of the studies (n = 11) presented a total score of 6 out of 10. Validated questionnaires and designed pilot-tested forms were the most frequently used ways of assessing knowledge. Some studies were stratified by race, age, or group minorities. The most used questionnaire was the prolapse and incontinence knowledge questionnaire (PIKQ) (n = 5). Knowledge and/or awareness regarding PFD was low to moderate among the studies. Urinary incontinence was the most prevalent PFD investigated, and the most important risk factors associated with the lack of knowledge of the pelvic floor were: African-American ethnicity (n = 3), low educational level (n = 4), low access to information (n = 5) and socioeconomic status (n = 3). CONCLUSION: Most women have a gap in the knowledge of pelvic floor muscle dysfunctions, do not understand their treatment options, and are not able to identify risk factors for these disorders. Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate whether women present adequate knowledge of the main pelvic floor disorders (PFDs) (urinary incontinence - UI, fecal incontinence - FI, and pelvic organ prolapse - POP). DATA SOURCES: A systematic review was performed in the MEDLINE, PEDro, CENTRAL, and Cochrane databases for publications from inception to April 2018. SELECTION OF STUDIES: A total of 3,125 studies were reviewed. Meta-analysis was not possible due to the heterogeneity of primary outcomes and the diversity of instruments for measuring knowledge. The quality of the articles included in the analysis was evaluated with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) adapted for cross-sectional studies. DATA COLLECTION: Two authors performed data extraction into a standardized spreadsheet. DATA SYNTHESIS: Nineteen studies were included, comprising 11,512 women. About the methodological quality (NOS), most of the studies (n = 11) presented a total score of 6 out of 10. Validated questionnaires and designed pilot-tested forms were the most frequently used ways of assessing knowledge. Some studies were stratified by race, age, or group minorities. The most used questionnaire was the prolapse and incontinence knowledge questionnaire (PIKQ) (n = 5). Knowledge and/or awareness regarding PFD was low to moderate among the studies. Urinary incontinence was the most prevalent PFD investigated, and the most important risk factors associated with the lack of knowledge of the pelvic floor were: African-American ethnicity (n = 3), low educational level (n = 4), low access to information (n = 5) and socioeconomic status (n = 3). CONCLUSION: Most women have a gap in the knowledge of pelvic floor muscle dysfunctions, do not understand their treatment options, and are not able to identify risk factors for these disorders. Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Authors: Lara Díaz-Álvarez; Laura Lorenzo-Gallego; Helena Romay-Barrero; Virginia Prieto-Gómez; María Torres-Lacomba; Beatriz Navarro-Brazález Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-07-29 Impact factor: 4.614