ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2017
Vaginal vault suspension during hysterectomy for benign indications: a prospective register study of agreement on terminology and surgical procedure.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisSeveral suspension methods are used to try to prevent pelvic organ prolapse (POP) after hysterectomy. We aimed to evaluate agreement on terminology and surgical procedure of these methods.
methodsWe randomly chose 532 medical records of women with a history of hysterectomy from the Danish Hysterectomy and Hysteroscopy Database (DHHD). Additionally, we video-recorded 36 randomly chosen hysterectomies. The hysterectomies were registered in the DHHD. The material was categorized according to predefined suspension methods. Agreement compared suspension codes in DHHD (gynecologists' registrations) with medical records (gynecologists' descriptions) and with videos (reviewers' categorizations) respectively. Whether the vaginal vault was suspended (pooled suspension) or not (no suspension method + not described) was analyzed, in addition to each suspension method.
resultsRegarding medical records, agreement on terminology was good among patients undergoing pooled suspension in cases of hysterectomy via the abdominal and vaginal route (agreement 78.7, 92.3%). Regarding videos, agreement on surgical procedure was good among pooled suspension patients in cases of hysterectomy via the abdominal, laparoscopic, and vaginal routes (agreement 88.9, 97.8, 100%). Agreement on individual suspension methods differed regarding both medical records (agreement 0-90.1%) and videos (agreement 0-100%).
conclusionsAgreement on terminology and surgical procedure regarding suspension method was good in respect of pooled suspension. However, disagreement was observed when individual suspension methods and operative details were scrutinized. Better consensus of terminology and surgical procedure is warranted to enable further research aimed at preventing POP among women undergoing hysterectomy.
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.