Rasa Ruseckaite1, Justin O Daly2,3, Joanne Dean2, Susannah Ahern2. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, 3004, Australia. rasa.ruseckaite@monash.edu. 2. Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, 3004, Australia. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Western Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective was to overview the literature on the existing pelvic floor procedure registries and databases and to identify patient demographic, clinical and/or patient-reported data items for inclusion in the Australasian Pelvic Floor Procedure Registry (APFPR) Minimum Data Set (MDS). METHODS: We conducted a literature search on the MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases in addition to Google Scholar and grey literature to identify studies in the period January 2008 to January 2020. All were English studies of registries and databases on female adults undergoing surgery for pelvic floor disorders including stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Studies were assessed on demographic and clinical patient characteristics, procedure or treatment type, health-related quality of life, adverse events and safety outcomes, captured by pelvic floor procedure registries or databases that have been established to date. RESULTS: From 1662 studies, 29 publications describing 22 different pelvic floor registries and databases were included for analysis, 12 (55%) of which were multicentre. Six (27%) registries and databases involved solely SUI, eight (36%) were regarding POP, and the remaining eight (36%) focussed on both conditions. The majority of registries and databases captured similar details on patient characteristics, comorbidities and other clinical features, procedure or treatment type, health-related quality of life, adverse events, safety and efficacy. CONCLUSION: The findings of this scoping review will assist in determining the MDS for the APFPR, an initiative of the Australian government, to improve health and quality of life outcomes of women who undergo pelvic floor reconstructive procedures.
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective was to overview the literature on the existing pelvic floor procedure registries and databases and to identify patient demographic, clinical and/or patient-reported data items for inclusion in the Australasian Pelvic Floor Procedure Registry (APFPR) Minimum Data Set (MDS). METHODS: We conducted a literature search on the MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases in addition to Google Scholar and grey literature to identify studies in the period January 2008 to January 2020. All were English studies of registries and databases on female adults undergoing surgery for pelvic floor disorders including stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Studies were assessed on demographic and clinical patient characteristics, procedure or treatment type, health-related quality of life, adverse events and safety outcomes, captured by pelvic floor procedure registries or databases that have been established to date. RESULTS: From 1662 studies, 29 publications describing 22 different pelvic floor registries and databases were included for analysis, 12 (55%) of which were multicentre. Six (27%) registries and databases involved solely SUI, eight (36%) were regarding POP, and the remaining eight (36%) focussed on both conditions. The majority of registries and databases captured similar details on patient characteristics, comorbidities and other clinical features, procedure or treatment type, health-related quality of life, adverse events, safety and efficacy. CONCLUSION: The findings of this scoping review will assist in determining the MDS for the APFPR, an initiative of the Australian government, to improve health and quality of life outcomes of women who undergo pelvic floor reconstructive procedures.
Authors: Bernard T Haylen; Robert M Freeman; Steven E Swift; Michel Cosson; G Willy Davila; Jan Deprest; Peter L Dwyer; Brigitte Fatton; Ervin Kocjancic; Joseph Lee; Chris Maher; Eckhard Petri; Diaa E Rizk; Peter K Sand; Gabriel N Schaer; Ralph Webb Journal: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Catherine S Bradley; Anthony G Visco; Emily E Weber LeBrun; Matthew D Barber Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2016 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.091
Authors: V Bjelic-Radisic; T Aigmueller; O Preyer; G Ralph; I Geiss; G Müller; P Riss; P Klug; M Konrad; G Wagner; M Medl; W Umek; P Lozano; K Tamussino; A Tammaa Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2014-02-12 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: Neurourol Urodyn Date: 2010 Impact factor: 2.696
Authors: Emily Weber LeBrun; Rony A Adam; Matthew D Barber; Sarah Hamilton Boyles; Cheryl B Iglesia; Emily S Lukacz; Pamela Moalli; Michael D Moen; Holly E Richter; Leslee L Subak; Vivian W Sung; Anthony G Visco; Catherine S Bradley Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2016 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.091
Authors: Dewan Md Emdadul Hoque; Rasa Ruseckaite; Paula Lorgelly; John J McNeil; Sue M Evans Journal: Int J Qual Health Care Date: 2018-04-01 Impact factor: 2.038
Authors: Rasa Ruseckaite; Ashika D Maharaj; Joanne Dean; Karolina Krysinska; Ilana N Ackerman; Angela L Brennan; Ljoudmila Busija; Helen Carter; Arul Earnest; Christopher B Forrest; Ian A Harris; Janet Sansoni; Susannah Ahern Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2022-03-01 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Rasa Ruseckaite; Claire Bavor; Lucy Marsh; Joanne Dean; Oliver Daly; Dora Vasiliadis; Susannah Ahern Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2022-02-03 Impact factor: 3.440