ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2015
One-year prospective comparison of vaginal pessaries and surgery for pelvic organ prolapse using the validated ICIQ-VS and ICIQ-UI (SF) questionnaires.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
36 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.
- What are the barriers and facilitators to self-management of chronic conditions reported by women? A systematic review.BMJ open · 2022Pooled it
- Do vaginal pessaries used to treat pelvic organ prolapse impact on sexual function? A systematic review and meta-analysis.International urogynecology journal · 2022Pooled it
- Vaginal Pessaries for Pelvic Organ Prolapse or Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Health Technology Assessment.Ontario health technology assessment series · 2021Pooled it
- Female pelvic organ prolapse using pessaries: systematic review.International urogynecology journal · 2016Pooled it
- Where to for pelvic organ prolapse treatment after the FDA pronouncements? A systematic review of the recent literature.International urogynecology journal · 2013Pooled it
- Trial
- Pessary Uptake and Outcomes in Women Who Ultimately Had Surgery for Prolapse.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- International Urogynecology Consultation Chapter 3 Committee 1 - Pessary Management.International urogynecology journal · 2025Review
- Understanding Factors That Affect Willingness to Self-Manage a Pessary for Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Questionnaire-Based Cross-Sectional Study of Pessary-Using Women in the UK.International urogynecology journal · 2024Article
- Quality of Life after Treatment for Pelvic Organ Prolapse in Real-World Study: Recommendations, Vaginal Pessary, and Surgery.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Observational
- Analysis of questions by patients with pelvic organ prolapse about vaginal pessaries resulting in a checklist for their physicians.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Article
- Pessary management practices for pelvic organ prolapse among Australian health care practitioners: a cross-sectional study.International urogynecology journal · 2023Article
- Current Perspectives in Vaginal Laxity Measurement: A Scoping Review.Archives of plastic surgery · 2023Article
- Quality of Life After Treatment for Pelvic Organ Prolapse: Vaginal Pessary versus Surgery.International journal of women's health · 2023Article
- Quality of Life Following Pelvic Organ Prolapse Treatments in Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Novel, disposable, self-inserted, vaginal device for the non-surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse: efficacy, safety, and quality of life.BMC women's health · 2022Article
- What is known from the existing literature about self-management of pessaries for pelvic organ prolapse? A scoping review.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Pessary or surgery for a symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse: the PEOPLE study, a multicentre prospective cohort study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2022Article
- Comparison of outcomes between pessary use and surgery for symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse: A prospective self-controlled study.Investigative and clinical urology · 2022Article
- What is known from the existing literature about self-management of pessaries for pelvic organ prolapse? A scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisVaginal pessaries, pelvic floor exercises and surgery are treatment options for women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (POP). The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of pessaries and surgery in women with symptomatic POP using the validated International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Vaginal Symptoms (ICIQ-VS) and Urinary Incontinence (ICIQ-UI) Short Form (SF).
methodsWomen attending the Urogynecology clinics with symptomatic POP were recruited. All women were treated using either a vaginal pessary or surgery. Outcomes were evaluated and then compared at 1 year using the validated ICIQ-VS and ICIQ-UI (SF) questionnaires.
resultsA total of 287 women with symptomatic prolapse were recruited. 269 women completed the questionnaires at baseline and 183 at 1 year. At 1 year, improvement was noted in quality of life (QOL), frequency of urinary leak and vaginal symptoms in both groups except for the symptom of vaginal soreness in the pessary group and the symptom of a tight vagina in the surgery group. However, both these symptoms were not bothersome. Women who underwent surgery demonstrated an improvement in faecal evacuation and sex life. There was an overall statistically significant improvement in vaginal, sex, QOL and urinary symptom scores in both groups. No statistically significant difference was noted between the surgery and the pessary groups.
conclusionsUsing validated questionnaires 1 year after treatment, women with symptomatic POP report improvement in vaginal, bowel, urinary and quality of life scores when treated with either pessary use or surgery. No statistically significant difference was noted in the two groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.