Suprapubic versus transurethral bladder drainage following reconstructive pelvic surgery: a comparison of patient satisfaction and quality of life.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: To assess the differences in patient-reported, catheter-specific satisfaction and quality of life with either suprapubic or transurethral postoperative bladder drainage following reconstructive pelvic surgery. METHODS: This was a prospective study of all eligible women who were scheduled to undergo reconstructive surgery requiring bladder drainage during the study period November 2013 to March 2015. Women who did not undergo the planned procedure(s) or did not require bladder drainage were excluded. The primary outcome was patient-reported quality of life using catheter-specific instruments including the Catheter-related Quality of Life (CIQOL) instrument, and a modified version of the Intermittent Self-Catheterization Questionnaire (ISC-Q), designed to evaluate aspects of catheter-related quality of life and satisfaction specific to the needs of the individual. RESULTS: A total of 178 women were analyzed, 108 in the transurethral catheter group and 70 in the suprapubic group. Women with suprapubic bladder drainage had higher quality of life and satisfaction scores than women with transurethral bladder drainage as measured by the ISC-Q (68.31 ± 16.87 vs. 54.04 ± 16.95, mean difference 14.27, 95 % CI 9.15 - 19.39). There was no difference in quality of life by the CIQOL. After regression analysis, women with suprapubic bladder drainage were more satisfied with their catheter-specific needs despite longer duration of catheter use, more concurrent continence surgery, and higher trait anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in catheter-specific quality of life and patient satisfaction scores favoring suprapubic bladder drainage support its continued use in appropriately selected women for treatment of temporary postoperative urinary retention after reconstructive pelvic surgery.

If you could see what we see, would it bother you?

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to determine whether the anatomic threshold for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) diagnosis and surgical success remains valid when the patient sees what we see on exam. METHODS: Two hundred participants were assigned, by computer-generated block randomization, to see one of four videos. Each video contained the same six clips representative of various degrees of anterior vaginal wall support. Participants were asked questions immediately after each clip. They were asked: "In your opinion, does this patient have a bulge or something falling out that she can see or feel in the vaginal area?" Similarly, they were asked to give their opinion on surgical outcome on a 4-point Likert scale. RESULTS: The proportion of participants who identified the presence of a vaginal bulge increased substantially at the level of early stage 2 prolapse (1 cm above the hymen), with 67 % answering yes to the question regarding bulge. The proportion of participants who felt that surgical outcome was less desirable also increased substantially at early stage 2 prolapse (1 cm above the hymen), with 52 % describing that outcome as "not at all" or "somewhat" successful. CONCLUSION: Early stage 2 POP (1 cm above the hymen) is the anatomic threshold at which women identify both a vaginal bulge and a less desirable surgical outcome when they see what we see on examination.

Impact of a Novel Vaginal Bowel Control System on Bowel Function.

BACKGROUND: Bowel dysfunction, including frequency, fecal urgency, stool consistency, and evacuation symptoms, contributes to fecal incontinence. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of a vaginal bowel control system on parameters of bowel function, including frequency, urgency, stool consistency, and evacuation. DESIGN: This was a secondary analysis of a multicenter, prospective clinical trial. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at 6 sites in the United States, including university hospitals and private practices in urogynecology and colorectal surgery. PATIENTS: A total of 56 evaluable female subjects aged 19 to 75 years with 4 or more fecal incontinence episodes on a 2-week bowel diary were included. INTERVENTIONS: The study intervention was composed of the vaginal bowel control system, consisting of a vaginal insert and pressure-regulated pump. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Subjects completed a 2-week baseline diary of bowel function before and after treatment completed at 1 month. Fecal urgency, consistency of stool (Bristol score), and completeness of evacuation were recorded for all bowel movements. RESULTS: Use of the insert was associated with an improvement in bowel function across all 4 categories. Two thirds (8/12) of subjects with a high frequency of daily stools (more than 2 per day) shifted to a normal or low frequency of stools. Analysis of Bristol stool scale scores demonstrated a significant reduction in the proportion of all bowel movements reported as liquid (Bristol 6 or 7), from 36% to 21% (p = 0.0001). On average, 54% of stools were associated with urgency at baseline compared with 26% at 1 month (p < 0.0001). Incomplete evacuations with all bowel movements were reduced from 39% to 26% of subjects at 1 month (p = 0.0034). LIMITATIONS: The study follow-up period was 1 month (with an optional additional 2 months). CONCLUSIONS: The vaginal bowel control system was associated with an improvement in bowel symptoms and function, including reduced bowel movement frequency, less fecal urgency, increased solid consistency, and improved evacuation in patients with significant fecal incontinence.

Operationalizing the Measurement of Socioeconomic Position in Our Urogynecology Study Populations: An Illustrative Review.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this illustrative review is to provide guidance for the measurement of socioeconomic position when conducting health disparities research in urogynecology study populations. METHODS: Deidentified data were extracted from existing investigational review board-approved research databases for illustrative purposes. Attributes collected included the study participant's marital status, level of educational attainment (in number of years of school completed) and occupation as well as the study participant's last/only spouses' level of education and occupation. Average household and female socioeconomic position scores were calculated using two established composite indices: (1) Hollingshead Four Factor Index of Social Position, (2) Green's Socioeconomic Status scores, and 2 single-item indices: (1) Hauser-Warren Socioeconomic Index of Occupation, (2) level of educational attainment. RESULTS: The Hollingshead Four Factor Index of Social Position more than the Hauser-Warren Socioeconomic Index of Occupation provides researchers with a continuous score that is normally distributed with the least skew from the dataset. Their greater standard deviations and low kurtotic values increase the probability that statistically significant differences in health outcomes predicted by socioeconomic position will be detected compared with Green's socioeconomic status scores. CONCLUSIONS: Collection of socioeconomic data is an important first step in gaining a better understanding of health disparities through elimination of confounding bias, and for the development of behavioral, educational, and legislative strategies to eliminate them. We favor average household socioeconomic position scores over female socioeconomic position scores because average household socioeconomic position scores are more reflective of overall resources and opportunities available to each family member.

Characteristics Associated With Successful Fitting of a Vaginal Bowel Control System for Fecal Incontinence.

OBJECTIVES: We previously showed that management with a novel vaginal bowel control system was efficacious in women with moderate to severe fecal incontinence. The objective of this secondary analysis was to evaluate the clinical characteristics associated with device-fitting success. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of an institutional review board-approved, multicenter, prospective, open-label clinical study of women aged 19 to 75 years with 4 or more episodes of fecal incontinence recorded on a 2-week baseline bowel diary. Those successfully fitted with the vaginal bowel control device entered a 1-month treatment period, and efficacy was assessed with a repeat bowel diary. Demographic data, medical and surgical history, and pelvic examination findings were compared across women with successful and unsuccessful completion of the fitting period. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: Six clinical sites in the United States recruited from August 2012 through October 2013. Overall, 110 women underwent attempted fitting, of which 61 (55.5%) of 110 were successful and entered the treatment portion of the study. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that previous prolapse surgery (P = 0.007) and shorter vaginal length (P = 0.041) were independently associated with unsuccessful fitting. Women who have not undergone previous prolapse surgery had 4.7 times the odds (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.53-14.53) of a successful fit. In addition, for every additional centimeter of vaginal length, women had 1.49 times the odds (95% CI, 1.02-2.17) of a successful fit. CONCLUSIONS: Shorter vaginal length and previous prolapse surgery were associated with an increased risk of fitting failure. These findings may be used to inform patients regarding their expectation of successful fitting.

Obliterative Surgery for the Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Patient Survey on Reasons for Surgery Selection and Postoperative Decision Regret and Satisfaction.

OBJECTIVES: To identify patient-reported reasons for selecting obliterative surgery for the purpose of predicting decision regret and satisfaction. METHODS: We created a deidentified database of patients who underwent an obliterative procedure for prolapse from 2006 to 2013. Patients were excluded if they declined study participation, were deceased, or had dementia. Participants completed a survey regarding reasons for selecting obliterative surgery and a modified version of validated questionnaires on decision regret (Decision Regret Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorder) and satisfaction (Satisfaction with Decision Scale-Pelvic Floor Disorder). Parsimonious multivariate linear regression models were constructed to determine if any of the reasons given for choosing obliterative surgery were independent predictors of decision regret and satisfaction after controlling for significant sociodemographic, clinical, and surgical outcome data identified by bivariate analysis. RESULTS: Seventy-seven women completed the surveys. "To follow my doctor's recommendations" and "no longer sexually active," and/or "did not plan to be" as reasons for selecting obliterative surgery made the most difference; however, these reasons were not identified as independent predictors of decision regret or satisfaction after controlling for confounders. The regret linear regression models identified preoperative sexual activity rather than the patient-reported reason "no longer sexually active and/or did not plan to be," as the only independent predictor of more decision regret after obliterative surgery (B coefficient 1.68, P < 0.01). The satisfaction linear regression models identified reoperation for any reason as an independent predictor of lower satisfaction (ß, -0.24; P = 0.04) and the patient-reported reason for choosing obliterative surgery "not interested in pessary" as a predictor of higher satisfaction (ß, 0.30, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: This study advances our knowledge about the obliterative surgical decision making process. Behavioral and educational interventions directed at improving patient and physician communications concerning the dynamics of sexual health issues in an aging population will likely decrease regret when obliterative surgery is chosen. Minimizing reoperation after obliterative surgery through increased experience, knowledge, and improved surgical skills and patient validation when pessary is declined will likely improve satisfaction when obliterative surgery is chosen.

A vaginal bowel-control system for the treatment of fecal incontinence.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of a vaginal bowel-control device and pump system for fecal incontinence treatment. METHODS: Women with a minimum of four fecal incontinence episodes over 2 weeks were fit with the intravaginal device. Treatment success, defined as a 50% or greater reduction of incontinent episodes, was assessed at 1 month. Participants were invited into an optional extended-wear period of another 2 months. Secondary outcomes included symptom improvement measured by the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life, Modified Manchester Health Questionnaire, and Patient Global Impression of Improvement. Adverse events were collected. Intention-to-treat analysis included participants who were successfully fit entering treatment. Per protocol, analysis included participants with a valid 1-month treatment diary. RESULTS: Sixty-one of 110 (55.5%) participants from six clinical sites were successfully fit and entered treatment. At 1 month, intention-to-treat success was 78.7% (48/61, P<.001); per protocol success, 85.7% (48/56, P<.001) and 85.7% (48/56) considered bowel symptoms "very much better" or "much better." There was significant improvement in all Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life (P<.001) and Modified Manchester (P≤.007) subscales. Success rate at 3 months was 86.4% (38/44; 95% confidence interval 73-95%). There were no serious adverse events; the most common study-wide device-related adverse event was pelvic cramping or discomfort (25/110 participants [22.7%]), the majority of events (16/25 [64%]) occurring during the fitting period. CONCLUSION: In women successfully fit with a vaginal bowel-control device for nonsurgical treatment for fecal incontinence, there was significant improvement in fecal incontinence by objective and subjective measures. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01655498. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: : II.