Outcome assessment with blinded versus unblinded POP-Q exams.
rct · Level II
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 21907962.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1016/j.ajog.2011.07.007.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
To determine whether blinded and unblinded Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) examinations differ in a randomized trial. Blinded POP-Q examinations performed at 3 months and 1 year were compared with unblinded examinations performed by the surgeon in a randomized trial of vaginal mesh for pelvic organ prolapse. Sixty-five patients were included in the study. Correlations between the blinded and unblinded POP-Q points and stages varied from low to moderate (rho = 0.29-0.78). At 3 months, the blinded overall prolapse recurrence rate was 45.3% compared with 39.1% based on unblinded staging (P = .34). At 1 year, the blinded overall recurrence rate was significantly higher than the unblinded recurrence rate: 68.3% vs 53.3% (P = .004). The 1-year blinded anterior wall recurrence rate was also higher than the recurrence based on unblinded staging: 56.7% vs 43.3% (P = .021). Use of unblinded POP-Q staging resulted in underestimation of 1-year overall recurrence after prolapse repair.
Medical subject headings
- Pelvic Organ Prolapse
- Physical Examination