Genital dystopia Archives - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia

  • Trabalhos Originais

    Interobserver reproducibility of pelvic organ prolapse classification suggested by the International Continence Society

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2003;25(5):353-358

    Summary

    Trabalhos Originais

    Interobserver reproducibility of pelvic organ prolapse classification suggested by the International Continence Society

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2003;25(5):353-358

    DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032003000500008

    Views1

    PURPOSE: to determine interobserver reliability of site-specific measurements and stages according to the proposed International Continence Society prolapse terminology document. METHODS: we analyzed 51 women during urogynecological investigation performed at the Urogynecology and Vaginal Surgery Sector of UNIFESP / EPM. We recorded the locations of point-specific measures proposed by the International Continence Society (ICS). They are: two in the anterior vaginal wall, two in the superior vagina, two in the posterior vaginal wall, genital hiatus, perineal body and total vaginal length. Then we recorded the stage of genital prolapse. Women underwent pelvic examinations by two investigators, each blinded to the results of the other's examination. The reproducibility of the nine site-specific measurements and the summary stage were analyzed using Pearson's correlation coefficient and the median measurements were compared by the paired-t test. RESULTS: there were substantial and highly significant correlations for each of the nine measurements. Correlation coefficient for point Aa was 0.89 (p<0.0001), point Ba 0.90 (p<0.0001), point C 0.97 (p<0.0001), point Ap de 0.72 (p<0.0001), point Bp 0.84 (p<0.0001), point D 0.91 (p<0.0001), genital hiatus 0.65 (p<0.0001), perineal body 0.66 (p<0.0001) e total vaginal length 0.73 (p<0.0001). We also did not note differences between the means of measurements by the two examiners. Staging was highly reproducible (r=0.81, p<0.0001). ln no subject did the stage vary by more than one; in 86,2%, stages were identical. CONCLUSIONS: there is a good reproducibility of measures using the system proposed by the International Continence Society prolapse terminology document.

    See more
    Interobserver reproducibility of pelvic organ prolapse classification suggested by the International Continence Society

Search

Search in:

Article type
abstract
book-review
brief-report
case-report
case-report -
correction
editorial
editorial -
letter
letter -
other
other -
rapid-communication
research-article
research-article -
review-article
review-article -
Section
Arigos Originais
Artigo de Revisão
Original Articles
Carta ao Editor
Carta ao Editor
Cartas
Case Report
Case Reports
Caso e Tratamento
Clinical Consensus Recommendation
Corrigendum
Editoriais
Editorial
Editorial
Equipamentos e Métodos
Errata
Erratas
Erratum
Febrasgo Position Statement
Febrasgo Statement
Febrasgo Statement Position
FIGO Statement
GUIDELINES
Integrative Review
Letter to Editor
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor
Métodos e Técnicas
Nota do Editor
Nota Prévia
Original Article
Original Article/Contraception
Original Article/Infertility
Original Article/Obstetrics
Original Article/Oncology
Original Article/Sexual Violence/Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology
Original Article/Teaching and Training
Original Articles
Original Articles
Relato de Caso
Relato de Casos
Relatos de Casos
Reply to the Letter to the Editor
Resposta dos Autores
Resumo De Tese
Resumo De Tese
Resumos de Tese
Resumos de Tese
Resumos de Teses
Resumos de Teses
Resumos dos Trabalhos Premiados no 50º Congresso Brasileiro de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
Revisão
Revisão
Short Communication
Special Article
Systematic Review
Técnica e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Métodos
Trabalhos Originais
Year / Volume
2024; v.46
2023; v.45
2022; v.44
2021; v.43
2020; v.42
2019; v.41
2018; v.40
2017; v.39
2016; v.38
2015; v.37
2014; v.36
2013; v.35
2012; v.34
2011; v.33
2010; v.32
2009; v.31
2008; v.30
2007; v.29
2006; v.28
2005; v.27
2004; v.26
2003; v.25
2002; v.24
2001; v.23
2000; v.22
1999; v.21
1998; v.20
ISSUE