ArticleInternational urogynecology journal2024
The Role of Self-Management in Pessary Therapy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse-A retrospective cohort study.
Article in International urogynecology journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Self-management of vaginal pessaries for pelvic organ prolapse: multi-method process evaluation, linked to the TOPSY randomised controlled trial.BMC medicine · 2025Trial
- Four Year Clinical and Cost Effectiveness of Vaginal Pessary Self-Management Versus Clinic-Based Care for Pelvic Organ Prolapse (TOPSY): Long Term Follow-Up of a Randomised Controlled Superiority Trial.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2025Trial
- The Success Rate of Hong Kong Chinese Women with Pelvic Organ Prolapse in Pessary Self-Management: a Multi-Centered Prospective Study.International urogynecology journal · 2026Article
- Factors contributing to long-term vaginal pessary use: A mixed-methods study.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introduction and hypothesisThis study investigated pessary self-management (PSM). The primary outcome was how often PSM was taught to patients with pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Secondary outcomes were associations of PSM with treatment continuation, side effects, changing to surgery, and number of doctor consultations in the first year after treatment initiation compared with clinical management (CM).
methodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted in 300 patients visiting three Dutch medical centres in 2019, and receiving a pessary for POP. The t test, Chi-squared test and logistic regression were performed to compare PSM with CM and to identify factors associated with treatment continuation.
resultsA total of 35% of patients received PSM instructions, of which 92% were able to perform PSM successfully. Treatment was continued by 83% of patients practicing PSM and 75% of patients having CM (p = 0.16), side effects occurred in 26% and 39% respectively (p = 0.18). Pain or discomfort was associated with treatment discontinuation (p < 0.01). In a subgroup analysis of patients who had a pessary suitable for PSM, treatment continuation was significantly higher in the PSM group (97%) than in the CM group (74%; p < 0.01).
conclusionsPessary self-management was only taught to 35% of patients who received a pessary, although the ability to perform PSM was high (92%). Treatment discontinuation was significantly lower in the PSM subgroup, when assessing the subgroup of patients using a pessary suitable for PSM. The large number of patients using a pessary suitable for PSM in the CM group implies that there is a lot to gain by promoting PSM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.