ArticleContinence (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2022
Covid-19, pelvic health, and women's voices: A descriptive study.
Article in Continence (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A mixed methods systematic literature review of barriers and facilitators to help-seeking among women with stigmatised pelvic health symptoms.BMC women's health · 2024Pooled it
- Impact of COVID-19 on Diaphragmatic Function: Understanding Multiorgan Involvement and Long-Term Consequences.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To examine how the pandemic affected women with pelvic dysfunction. Methods: A Survey Monkey™ online questionnaire on how the pandemic and Covid-19 infection affected women's pelvic problems, exercise, and weight. A free text box captured their comments. Results: Six hundred and forty-seven women took part. Bladder control 265 (41%), prolapse 240 (37%), pelvic pain 40 (6%), sexual dysfunction 27 (4%), faecal incontinence 19 (3%) and other symptoms 56 (9%) were women's main pelvic problems. Symptoms were unchanged for 331 (51%), worse for 243 (38%), and improved for 60 (10%). Weight was gained by 290 (45%), unchanged by 243 (38%), and lost by 114 (17%). Exercise levels were unchanged, worse, or better in 33% each. Access to medical appointments and date for surgery were difficult for 235 (36.5%) and 38 (6%) women respectively. Sixty-six (10.3%) women reported Covid-19 infection: the distribution of pelvic problems and changes through the pandemic, weight and exercise patterns, and difficulty accessing a date for surgery or healthcare were similar to those not contracting infection. Sexual dysfunction was the main new or worsening problem, featuring 13 women (18%). Seventy women - 16 postnatal, and 54 with a pre-existing pelvic problem commented. Five core themes were identified. Difficulty accessing healthcare review, mental health impact and physiotherapy services especially affected delivered women: lifestyle alterations and conservative treatment tools were prominent in women with a pre-existing problem. Conclusions: Pelvic floor dysfunction adversely affected women's mental health in the pandemic through limiting their ability to exercise. Furthermore, the pandemic exposed the fact that female pelvic health services are not readily available to those in need: many women particularly postnatally received no care. Sexual dysfunction was a feature of recovery from Covid infection in this study.
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.