Priority 14 from the Pessary use for Prolapse PSP
| UNCERTAINTY: Are pessaries effective in the treatment of prolapse? (JLA PSP Priority 14) | |
|---|---|
| Overall ranking | 14 |
| JLA question ID | 0054/14 |
| Explanatory note | Very few randomised controlled trials -which are considered to be the most rigorous type of research - have been conducted to enable this question to be answered. Examples: Can a pessary actually make a POP better/improve? How effective is a pessary at treating a prolapse? |
| Evidence |
The best available review is: Bugge C, Adams EJ, Gopinath D, Reid F. Pessaries (mechanical devices) for pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD004010. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004010.pub3 |
| Health Research Classification System category | Renal and urogenital |
| Extra information provided by this PSP | |
|---|---|
| Original uncertainty examples |
How effective is the pessary in treating POP? ~ How effective are pessaries at improving quality of life for women with grade 1/2 prolapse? ~ Will it make the prolapse better? |
| Submitted by | 2 x healthcare professionals, 3 x women, 1 x literature |
| PSP information | |
|---|---|
| PSP unique ID | 0054 |
| PSP name | Pessary use for Prolapse |
| Total number of uncertainties identified by this PSP. | 66 (To see a full list of all uncertainties identified, please see the detailed spreadsheet held on the JLA website) |
| Date of priority setting workshop | 8 September 2017 |