Literature DB >> 9420489

Impact of surgery for stress incontinence on morbidity: cohort study.

N Black1, J Griffiths, C Pope, A Bowling, P Abel.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To describe the impact of surgery for stress incontinence on the severity of symptoms, other mental and physical symptoms, and overall health. To describe the incidence of postoperative complications.
DESIGN: Prospective cohort study; questionnaires completed by patients before and 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Questionnaires completed by surgeons both before and after surgery.
SETTING: 18 hospitals in the North Thames region.
SUBJECTS: 442 women treated surgically for stress incontinence between January 1993 and June 1994. 367 women returned the 3 month questionnaire; 364 returned the 6 month questionnaire; and 359 returned the 12 month questionnaire. 49 surgeons provided perioperative information on 285 of the 442 women and postoperative information on 278. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Stress incontinence symptom severity index, other urinary symptoms, bowel function, mental health, complications, global measures.
RESULTS: Most women (288; 87%) reported an improvement in the severity of their stress incontinence, though only 92 (28%) were cured (continent). These improvements persisted for at least 12 months. The likelihood of improvement was similar regardless of whether urodynamic pressure studies had been conducted before surgery. Following surgery, women were less likely to suffer from urinary frequency, nocturia, postvoid fullness, dysuria, and urgency. While mental health improved for 194 (71%), a quarter of women reported deterioration. Only 37 (10%) were satisfied with postoperative pain control. A third experienced one or more complications while in hospital, most commonly difficulty urinating. This problem affected 1 in 11 women after discharge. A year after surgery two thirds of women reported feeling better (251; 72%), that the outcome met or exceeded their expectations (230; 66%), and that they would recommend the operation to a friend in a similar situation (239; 68%), and that they would recommend the operation to a friend in a similar situation (239; 68%). Surgeons tended to be more optimistic about the effects of surgery; they were satisfied with the outcome in 176 (85%) cases and would again treat 245 (94%) of the women as they had done previously.
CONCLUSIONS: Although surgery reduces the severity of stress incontinence it is not as effective as current textbooks suggest. Women considering surgery should be provided with more accurate information on the likelihood of an improvement in symptoms and the occurrence of complications, including postoperative pain. Urgency and urge incontinence should not be considered contraindications to surgery. The need for urodynamic assessment before surgery should be reappraised.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9420489      PMCID: PMC2127933          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.315.7121.1493

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  26 in total

1.  How colposuspensions are performed in the UK: a survey of gynecologists' practice.

Authors:  O A Adekanmi; R M Freeman; L Bombieri
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2003-07-23

Review 2.  What's a 'cure'? Patient-centred outcomes of treatments for stress urinary incontinence.

Authors:  R M Freeman
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2006-09-12

3.  The Larsson frequency/volume chart is not a substitute for cystometry in the investigation of women with urinary incontinence.

Authors:  D G Tincello; D H Richmond
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  1998

4.  Impact of surgery for stress incontinence on morbidity. Effects of confounding variables on outcomes of incontinence surgery must be considered.

Authors:  V Khullar; L Cardozo; K Boos; J Bidmead; C Kelleher
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-07-11

5.  What patients think: patient-reported outcomes of retropubic versus trans-obturator mid-urethral slings for urodynamic stress incontinence--a multi-centre randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Robert Freeman; David Holmes; Timothy Hillard; Phillip Smith; Mark James; Abdul Sultan; Roland Morley; Qian Yang; Paul Abrams
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2011-01-11       Impact factor: 2.894

6.  Outcome measures in urogynaecology: the clinicians' perspective.

Authors:  Dudley Robinson; Kate Anders; Linda Cardozo; John Bidmead
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2006-06-28

Review 7.  Anterior vaginal repair for urinary incontinence in women.

Authors:  Cathryn Ma Glazener; Kevin Cooper; Atefeh Mashayekhi
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-07-31

8.  Validation of the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) for urogenital prolapse.

Authors:  Sushma Srikrishna; Dudley Robinson; Linda Cardozo
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2009-12-15       Impact factor: 2.894

9.  EuroQol EQ-5D and condition-specific measures of health outcome in women with urinary incontinence: reliability, validity and responsiveness.

Authors:  Kirstie L Haywood; Andrew M Garratt; Ranjit Lall; Jan Fereday Smith; Sarah E Lamb
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2008-02-15       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  Perspectives by patients and physicians on outcomes of mid-urethral sling surgery.

Authors:  R Marijn Houwert; Daphne N van Munster; Jan Paul W R Roovers; Pieter L Venema; Marcel G W Dijkgraaf; Hein W Bruinse; Harry A M Vervest
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 2.894

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.