Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28213798›Full record

Observational studyInternational urogynecology journal2017

Digital rectal examination in the evaluation of rectovaginal septal defects.

Suneetha Rachaneni, Ixora Kamisan Atan, Ka Lai Shek, Hans Peter Dietz

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study 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 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2019
    Article
  6. Educational implications of changing the guidelines for the digital rectal examination.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2019
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Association between vaginal parity and rectocele.International urogynecology journal · 2018
    Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Suneetha RachaneniSchool of Clinical and Experimental Medicine , University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK. sunilalam@yahoo.com.
Ixora Kamisan AtanUniversiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Ka Lai ShekDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Liverpool Clinical School, University of Western Sydney, Parramatta, Australia.
Hans Peter DietzDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sydney Medical School Nepean, University of Sydney, Penrith, Australia.
University Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre · MYUniversity of Birmingham · GBUniversity of Sydney · AUWestern Sydney University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introduction and hypothesisThe objective was to evaluate the diagnostic potential of digital rectal examination in the identification of a true rectocele.

methodsThis is a retrospective observational study utilising 187 archived data sets of women presenting with lower urinary tract symptoms and/or pelvic organ prolapse between August 2012 and November 2013. Evaluation included a standardised interview, ICS-POPQ, rectal examination and 4D translabial ultrasound. The main outcome measure was the diagnosis of rectocele by digital rectal palpation on Valsalva manoeuvre. This diagnosis correlated with the sonographic diagnosis of rectocele to determine agreement between digital examination and ultrasound findings.

resultsComplete data sets were available for 180 participants. On imaging, the mean position of the rectal ampulla was 11.07 (-36.3 to 44.3) mm below the symphysis pubis; 42.8% (77) had a rectocele of a depth of ≥10 mm. On palpation, a rectocele was detected in 60 women (33%). Agreement between palpation and imaging was observed in 77%; the kappa was 0.52 (CI 0.39-0.65). On receiver operator characteristic analysis, the area under the curve was 0.854 for the relationship between rectocele pocket depth and the detection of rectocele on palpation.

conclusionModerate agreement was found between digital rectal examination for rectocele and translabial ultrasound findings of a "true rectocele". Digital rectal examination may be used to identify these defects in clinical practice. Extending the clinical examination of prolapse to include rectal examination to palpate defects in the rectovaginal septum may reduce the need for defecatory proctograms for the assessment of obstructive defecation and may help triage patients in the management of posterior compartment prolapse.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overDigital Rectal ExaminationFemaleHumansLower Urinary Tract SymptomsMiddle AgedPelvic FloorPelvic Organ ProlapseRectoceleRectumRetrospective StudiesUltrasonographyVaginaYoung AdultDigital rectal examinationObstructed defecationPelvic organ prolapseRectoceleRectovaginal septumTranslabial ultrasound

Identifiers

PMID28213798
OpenAlexW2587870372

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.