Effect of patient position on clinical evaluation of pelvic organ prolapse

被引:61
作者
Barber, MD [1 ]
Lambers, AR [1 ]
Visco, AG [1 ]
Bump, RC [1 ]
机构
[1] Duke Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Obstet & Gynecol, Div Gynecol Specialties, Durham, NC 27710 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0029-7844(00)00859-0
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Objective: To compare the severity of pelvic organ prolapse between examinations performed in dorsal lithotomy position and examinations performed upright in a birthing chair using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification System (POPQ). Methods: One hundred eighty-nine consecutive women were evaluated between April 1997 and September 1998. All women were examined in the dorsal lithotomy position and in a birthing chair at a 45 degrees angle. Degree of pelvic organ prolapse was assessed using the POPQ. Results: When examined upright, 133 patients (70%) had the same stage of prolapse, whereas 49 (26%) had a higher stage and seven (4%) had a lower stage. Of patients who were stage 0 or I when examined in lithotomy position, 23 (36%) were stage II or greater when examined upright. Similarly, of patients who were stage II in lithotomy, 17 (23%) were stage III or higher when examined upright. There was a statistically significant increase in the degree of prolapse at all the POPQ measurements (P <.05 for each point), except for measurement of total vaginal length. Forty-eight percent of patients had at least one measurement increase by 2 cm or more when examined upright. Logistic regression identified no patient characteristics that were independently associated with a significant increase in stage or POPQ values with change in examination position. Conclusion: The degree of pelvic organ prolapse assessed with the patient in the lithotomy position correlates well with assessment performed upright; however, overall there is a higher degree of prolapse with upright examination. (Obstet Gynecol 2000;96:18-22. (C) 2000 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.).
引用
收藏
页码:18 / 22
页数:5
相关论文
共 11 条
[1]  
Baden WF., 1992, SURG REPAIR VAGINAL, P13
[2]   CLASSIFICATION OF VAGINAL RELAXATION [J].
BEECHAM, CT .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1980, 136 (07) :957-958
[3]  
Brubaker L., 1996, J PELVIC SURG, V2, P257
[4]   The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction [J].
Bump, RC ;
Mattiasson, A ;
Bo, K ;
Brubaker, LP ;
DeLancey, JOL ;
Klarskov, P ;
Shull, BL ;
Smith, ARB .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1996, 175 (01) :10-17
[5]  
Grody Marvin H. Terry, 1997, P1044
[6]   Interobserver and intraobserver reliability of the proposed International Continence Society, Society of Gynecologic Surgeons, and American Urogynecologic Society pelvic organ prolapse classification system [J].
Hall, AF ;
Theofrastous, JP ;
Cundiff, GW ;
Harris, RL ;
Hamilton, LF ;
Swift, SE ;
Bump, RC .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1996, 175 (06) :1467-1470
[7]  
Kobak W H, 1996, Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct, V7, P121, DOI 10.1007/BF01894199
[8]  
PORGES RF, 1963, SURG GYNECOL OBSTET, V117, P769
[9]   Teaching the pelvic organ prolapse quantitation system [J].
Steele, A ;
Mallipeddi, P ;
Welgoss, J ;
Soled, S ;
Kohli, N ;
Karram, M .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1998, 179 (06) :1458-1463
[10]   Comparison of pelvic organ prolapse in the dorsal lithotomy compared with the standing position [J].
Swift, SE ;
Herring, M .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1998, 91 (06) :961-964