Outcome assessment with blinded versus unblinded POP-Q exams

Danielle Antosh, Cheryl B. Iglesia, Sonali Vora, Andrew I. Sokol

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

13 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether blinded and unblinded Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) examinations differ in a randomized trial. Study Design: Blinded POP-Q examinations performed at 3 months and 1 year were compared with unblinded examinations performed by the surgeon in a randomized trial of vaginal mesh for pelvic organ prolapse. Results: Sixty-five patients were included in the study. Correlations between the blinded and unblinded POP-Q points and stages varied from low to moderate (rho = 0.29-0.78). At 3 months, the blinded overall prolapse recurrence rate was 45.3% compared with 39.1% based on unblinded staging (P =.34). At 1 year, the blinded overall recurrence rate was significantly higher than the unblinded recurrence rate: 68.3% vs 53.3% (P =.004). The 1-year blinded anterior wall recurrence rate was also higher than the recurrence based on unblinded staging: 56.7% vs 43.3% (P =.021). Conclusion: Use of unblinded POP-Q staging resulted in underestimation of 1-year overall recurrence after prolapse repair.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)489.e1-489.e4
JournalAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
Volume205
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2011

Keywords

  • blinded
  • examination
  • POP-Q
  • randomized
  • unblinded

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Outcome assessment with blinded versus unblinded POP-Q exams'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this