Factors affecting patient choice for continued observation versus intervention for pelvic organ prolapse

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

To analyze the reasons for eventual choice of a therapeutic intervention in subjects who initially chose observation for bothersome pelvic organ prolapse (POP) over therapeutic intervention at their first urogynecology clinic visit.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study of women with bothersome POP who initially chose observation over therapeutic intervention at one institution from 2002 to 2015. Subjects were followed over time with sequential pelvic organ prolapse quantification examinations (POP-Q) and assessments of symptoms and bother utilizing non-validated standard questions. Subjects were divided into two groups: (1) those who chose continued observation versus (2) those who chose therapeutic intervention with either pessary or surgery. Demographic information, POP-Q examinations, and POP symptoms and bother were collected. We analyzed which clinical variables influenced patient decision to elect for therapeutic intervention.

Results

A total of 111 subjects were enrolled. The distribution of initial POP-Q stage was: stage 2 = 54%; stage 3 = 45%; stage 4 = 1%. Median follow-up was 24 months (range 6 and 110 months). At their last recorded visit, 73 subjects (66%) continued observation and 38 subjects (34%) chose pessary or surgical intervention. We investigated clinical factors for choosing intervention. Increase in POP symptom bother was the only variable that remained significant in determining patient choice of a therapeutic intervention (p < 0.001) after confounding factors were controlled for using multivariate regression analysis.

Conclusion

In subjects with bothersome POP who initially choose observation and subsequently elect to pursue a therapeutic intervention, worsening symptom bother is the most important factor.