Skip to main content
Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal 2/2003

01.06.2003 | Original Article

Effects of examination technique modifications on pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q) results

verfasst von: Anthony G. Visco, John T. Wei, Leslie Ain McClure, Victoria L. Handa, Ingrid E. Nygaard

Erschienen in: International Urogynecology Journal | Ausgabe 2/2003

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The pelvic organ prolapse quantification system (POP-Q) is currently the most quantitative, site-specific system for describing pelvic organ prolapse. To ensure that anatomic outcomes can be optimally assessed, investigators in the Pelvic Floor Disorders Network evaluated the impact of specific technique variations on POP-Q measurements performed on 133 patients by 16 examiners at seven sites. Values for genital hiatus and perineal body were higher when measured with maximal strain than on resting. With the exception of TVL, internal points did not differ significantly when measured with or without a speculum. The maximum extent of prolapse was best seen with the patient standing. These results suggest that genital hiatus and perineal body should be measured at rest and during straining, as the measurements may assess different aspects of pelvic floor function, and that internal points can be measured with or without a speculum. They also emphasize the value of the standing examination to observe the maximum extent of pelvic organ prolapse.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K et al (1996) The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 175:10–17PubMed Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K et al (1996) The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 175:10–17PubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Hall AF, Theofrastous JP, Cundiff GW et al (1996) Interobserver and intraobserver reliability of the proposed International Continence Society, Society of Gynecologic Surgeons, and American Urogynecologic Society pelvic organ prolapse classification system. Am J Obstet Gynecol 175:1467–1470; discussion 1470–1471PubMed Hall AF, Theofrastous JP, Cundiff GW et al (1996) Interobserver and intraobserver reliability of the proposed International Continence Society, Society of Gynecologic Surgeons, and American Urogynecologic Society pelvic organ prolapse classification system. Am J Obstet Gynecol 175:1467–1470; discussion 1470–1471PubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Kobak WH, Rosenberger K, Walters MD (1996) Interobserver variation in the assessment of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 7:121–124 Kobak WH, Rosenberger K, Walters MD (1996) Interobserver variation in the assessment of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 7:121–124
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Barber MD, Lambers A, Visco AG et al (2000) Effect of patient position on clinical evaluation of pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 96:18–22CrossRefPubMed Barber MD, Lambers A, Visco AG et al (2000) Effect of patient position on clinical evaluation of pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 96:18–22CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Swift SE (2000) The distribution of pelvic organ support in a population of female subjects seen for routine gynecologic health care. Am J Obstet Gynecol 183:277–285CrossRefPubMed Swift SE (2000) The distribution of pelvic organ support in a population of female subjects seen for routine gynecologic health care. Am J Obstet Gynecol 183:277–285CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Heit M, Culligan P, Rosenquist C et al (2002) Is pelvic organ prolapse a cause of pelvic or low back pain? Obstet Gynecol 99:23–28CrossRefPubMed Heit M, Culligan P, Rosenquist C et al (2002) Is pelvic organ prolapse a cause of pelvic or low back pain? Obstet Gynecol 99:23–28CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Effects of examination technique modifications on pelvic organ prolapse quantification (POP-Q) results
verfasst von
Anthony G. Visco
John T. Wei
Leslie Ain McClure
Victoria L. Handa
Ingrid E. Nygaard
Publikationsdatum
01.06.2003
Verlag
Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in
International Urogynecology Journal / Ausgabe 2/2003
Print ISSN: 0937-3462
Elektronische ISSN: 1433-3023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-002-1030-3

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2003

International Urogynecology Journal 2/2003 Zur Ausgabe

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.