Premium
A systematic review of reported outcomes and outcome measures in randomized controlled trials on apical prolapse surgery
Author(s) -
Mattos Lourenço Thais Regina,
Pergialiotis Vasilis,
Durnea Constantin,
Elfituri Abdullatif,
Haddad Jorge Milhem,
Betschart Cornelia,
Falconi Gabriele,
Doumouchtsis Stergios K.
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
international journal of gynecology and obstetrics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.895
H-Index - 97
eISSN - 1879-3479
pISSN - 0020-7292
DOI - 10.1002/ijgo.12766
Subject(s) - medicine , randomized controlled trial , medline , psychological intervention , surgery , physical therapy , psychiatry , political science , law
Background Evidence on efficacy and safety of pelvic organ prolapse interventions is variable, and methodological flaws preclude meaningful synthesis of primary research data. Objective To evaluate variations in reported outcomes and outcome measures in randomized controlled trials ( RCT s) on apical prolapse surgical interventions. Search strategy We searched Cochrane, EMBASE , MEDLINE , and Scopus for English‐language articles published from inception to September 30, 2017, using the terms “management”, “repair”, “operation”, and “pelvic organ prolapse”. Selection criteria RCT s on apical prolapse surgical treatment. Data collection and analysis Outcomes and outcome measures were identified and categorized into domains. Studies were evaluated for quality of outcomes. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate frequencies. Main results Forty‐three RCT s were included. Seventy‐six outcomes and 66 outcome measures were identified. Bladder and ureteric injury were the most commonly reported intraoperative complications (19/31 studies; 61%). Quality of life was assessed by 19 different instruments and questionnaires. Fourteen (45%) of 31 studies used recurrence of prolapse as a postoperative anatomical outcome. Conclusions Substantial variation in reported outcomes and outcome measures was confirmed, precluding comparisons across trials and synthesis of the results. Development of a core outcome set will enable high‐quality meta‐analyses to be performed in the future. PROSPERO registration: CRD 42017062456.