+ Site Statistics
References:
54,258,434
Abstracts:
29,560,870
PMIDs:
28,072,757
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Comparative study to evaluate the intersystem association and reliability between standard pelvic organ prolapse quantification system and simplified pelvic organ prolapse scoring system



Comparative study to evaluate the intersystem association and reliability between standard pelvic organ prolapse quantification system and simplified pelvic organ prolapse scoring system



Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of India 64(6): 421-424



The purpose of this study was to determine the association between the standard pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POPQ) classification system and the simplified pelvic organ prolapse (S-POP) classification system. This is an observational study, in which 100 subjects, whose average age was 60 ± 10 years, with pelvic floor disorder symptoms underwent two systems of examinations-POPQ classification system and S-POP classification system at Safdarjung hospital-done by four gynecologists (two specialists and two resident doctors) using a prospective randomized study, blinded to each other's findings. Data were compared using appropriate statistics. The weighted Kappa statistics for the intersystem reliability of the S-POP classification system compared with standard POPQ classification system were 0.82 for the overall stage: 0.83 and 0.86 for the anterior and posterior vaginal walls respectively; 0.81 for the apex/vaginal cuff; and 0.89 for the cervix. All these results demonstrate significant agreement between the two systems. There is almost perfect intersystem agreement between the S-POP classification system and the standard POPQ classification system in respect of the overall stage as well as each point within the same system.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 057459694

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 25489146

DOI: 10.1007/s13224-014-0537-0


Related references

The inter-system association between the simplified pelvic organ prolapse quantification system (S-POP) and the standard pelvic organ prolapse quantification system (POPQ) in describing pelvic organ prolapse. International Urogynecology Journal 22(3): 347-352, 2011

Interobserver Agreement and Intersystem Comparison of the Halfway System of Baden and Walker Versus the Pelvic Organ Prolapse???Quantitation Prolapse Classification System in Assessing the Severity of Pelvic Organ Prolapse. Journal of Pelvic Medicine and Surgery 11(5): 243-250, 2005

Prevalence of metabolic syndrome and its components in women with and without pelvic organ prolapse and its association with prolapse severity according to the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system. International Urogynecology Journal 2018, 2018

A comparison of preoperative and intraoperative evaluation of patients undergoing pelvic reconstructive surgery for pelvic organ prolapse using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System. International Urogynecology Journal and Pelvic Floor Dysfunction 17(1): 46-49, 2005

Effect of age, body mass index, and parity on Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system measurements in women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research 38(2): 415-419, 2012

The effect of episiotomy on pelvic organ prolapse assessed by pelvic organ prolapse quantification system. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology 173: 34-37, 2014

Utilize the simplified POP-Q system in the clinical practice of staging for pelvic organ prolapse: comparative analysis with standard POP-Q system. Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi 51(7): 510-514, 2017

Feasibility, inter- and intra-rater reliability of physiotherapists measuring prolapse using the pelvic organ prolapse quantification system. International Urogynecology Journal 21(6): 651-656, 2010

Relationship between the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system (POP-Q), the Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7), and the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) before and after anterior vaginal wall prolapse surgery. International Urogynecology Journal 26(2): 195-200, 2015

NON-ORAL POSTER 49: Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System: Should It Be Simplified?. Journal of Pelvic Medicine and Surgery 12(2): 100-101, 2006

Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System (POP-Q) - a new era in pelvic prolapse staging. Journal of Medicine and Life 4(1): 75-81, 2011

Accuracy of assessing Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification points using dynamic 2D transperineal ultrasound in women with pelvic organ prolapse. International Urogynecology Journal 23(11): 1555-1560, 2013

Do Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification Examination Ba and D Guide the Selection of Operation for Severe Pelvic Organ Prolapse?. Journal of Investigative Surgery 2018: 1-8, 2018

Perioperative changes in superficial Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system measurements after prolapse surgery. International Journal of Gynaecology and Obstetrics: the Official Organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics 2019, 2019

The association of pelvic organ prolapse severity and improvement in overactive bladder symptoms after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Obstetrics and Gynecology Science 59(3): 214-219, 2016