Qualidade de vida das pacientes com distopias vaginais tratadas com pessário
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##
Publicado
Apr 30, 2023
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Resumo
Objetivo: Avaliar a melhoria na qualidade de vida das pacientes submetidas ao tratamento com pessário para a correção de distopias vaginais, bem como avaliar em quais domínios da vida houve maior repercussão. Métodos: Foi realizado um estudo observacional, transversal e descritivo, com pacientes que utilizaram pessário como opção de tratamento conservador de distopias vaginais e estão sendo acompanhadas em um hospital regional do Distrito Federal. Resultados: Foram incluídas três pacientes que atenderam aos critérios de inclusão proposto para este estudo. Houveram uma melhora significativa nos domínios relacionados as limitações físicas/sociais (de 21 para 0 pontos) e nas emoções (44 para 0), sendo esse os que tiveram melhores desempenhos. Os domínios referentes as limitações das atividades diárias e relacionamento pessoal permaneceram inalterável. E os domínios referentes a percepção geral da saúde (de 61 para 44 pontos), impacto do prolapso (de 46 para 33 pontos), sono/energia (de 12 para 4 pontos) e gravidade dos sintomas (de 20 para 10 pontos), tiveram uma melhora razoável. Conclusão: Conclui-se que houve melhora na qualidade de vida das pacientes, após seis meses de acompanhamento de tratamento conservador da distopia genital com pessário.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Como Citar
LeiteA. B., SouzaN. M. de P., & AdornoG. R. (2023). Qualidade de vida das pacientes com distopias vaginais tratadas com pessário. Revista Eletrônica Acervo Saúde, 23(4), e12339. https://doi.org/10.25248/reas.e12339.2023
Seção
Artigos Originais
Copyright © | Todos os direitos reservados.
A revista detém os direitos autorais exclusivos de publicação deste artigo nos termos da lei 9610/98.
Reprodução parcial
É livre o uso de partes do texto, figuras e questionário do artigo, sendo obrigatória a citação dos autores e revista.
Reprodução total
É expressamente proibida, devendo ser autorizada pela revista.
Referências
1. BØ K, et al. International urogynecology consultation chapter 3 committee 2; conservative treatment of patient with pelvic organ prolapse: Pelvic floor muscle training. Int Urogynecol J., 2022; 33(10): 2633-2667.
2. BELAYNEH T, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse surgery and health-related quality of life: a follow-up study. BMC Womens Health., 2021; 21(1): 1-4.
3. BODNER-ADLER B, et al. Prolapse surgery versus vaginal pessary in women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse: which factors influence the choice of treatment? Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019; 299(3): 773–777.
4. BRANDT C e VUUREN ECJV. Dysfunction, activity limitations, participation restriction and contextual factors in South African women with pelvic organ prolapse. S Afr J Physiother. 2019; 75(1): e933.
5. BROWN L, et al. Defining patient knowledge and perceptions of vaginal pessaries for prolapse and incontinence. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg., 2016; 22(2): 93-97.
6. BUGGE C, et al. Pessaries (mechanical devices) for managing pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev., 2020; 11(11): CD004010.
7. BUMP RC, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1996; 175(1): 10-17.
8. CARRAMÃO S, et al. Estudo randômico da correção cirúrgica do prolapso uterino através de tela sintética de polipropileno tipo I comparando histerectomia versus preservação uterina. Rev. Col. Bras. Cir., 2009; 36(1): 65-72.
9. CARROLL L, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse: The lived experience. PLoS One., 2022; 17(11): e0276788.
10. COELHO SA, et al. Factors associated with the prescription of vaginal pessaries for pelvic organ prolapse. Clínicas (São Paulo), 2019; 74(1): e934.
11. COELHO S, et al. Quality of life and vaginal symptoms of postmenopausal women using pessary for pelvic organ prolapse: a prospective study. Rev Assoc Med Bra. 2018; 64(12): 1103-1107.
12. CONWAY CK, et al. Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Review of In Vitro Testing of Pelvic Support Mechanisms. Ochsner J., 2020; 20(4): 410–418.
13. DELANCEY JO. Anatomic aspects of vaginal eversion after hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol., 1992; 166(6): 1717-1724.
14. DWYER L, et al. What is known from the existing literature about self-management of pessaries for pelvic organ prolapse? A scoping review. BMJ Open., 2022; 12(1): e055587.
15. ENIKEEV ME, et al. Repair of cystocele and apical genital prolapse using 6-strap mesh implant. Urologia, 2020; 87(3): 130-136.
16. FIGUEIRÊDO-NETTO O, et al. Colpopexia sacroespinhal: análise de sua aplicação em portadoras de prolapso uterovaginal e de cúpula vaginal pós-histerectomia. Rev. Bras. Gine Obstet., 2004; 26(10): 1-5.
17. FERNANDES ACN, et al. Conservative non-pharmacological interventions in women with pelvic floor dysfunction: a systematic review of qualitative studies. BMC Womens Health, 2022; 22(1): e515.
18. GHANBARI Z, et al. Quality of Life Following Pelvic Organ Prolapse Treatments in Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Clin Med., 2022; 11(23): 7166.
19. HAYLEN BT, et al. Erratum to: An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) / International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Int Urogynecol J. 2016; 27(2): 165-94.
20. KAMIńSKA A, et al. Reliability of the Polish Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12) and Assessment of Sexual Function before and after Pelvic Organ Prolapse Reconstructive Surgery—A Prospective Study. J Clin Med., 2021; 10(18): e4167.
21. LASNEL MM, et al. Patient satisfaction and symptom changes in women using a pessary for pelvic organ prolapse. Prog Urol, 2020; 30(7): 381-389.
22. LINDER BJ, et al. Comparison of outcomes between pessary use and surgery for symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse: A prospective self-controlled study. Investig Clin Urol., 2022; 63(2): 214-220.
23. LONG J, et al. An estriol-eluting pessary to treat pelvic organ prolapse. Sci Rep., 2022; 12(1): e20021.
24. MANZINI C, et al. Parameters associated with unsuccessful pessary fitting for pelvic organ prolapse up to three months follow-up: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Urogynecol J., 2022; 33(7): 1719-1763.
25. MAO M, et al. Factors associated with long-term pessary use in women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse. Climacteric, 2019; 22(5): 478-482.
26. MCNEILL ER, et al. The impact on complication rates of delayed routine pessary reviews during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int Urogynecol J., 2022; 22(1): 1-7.
27. MELKIE TB, et al. Translation, reliability, and validity of Amharic versions of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7). PLoS One, 2022; 17(11): e0270434.
28. NEBEL S, et al. How Satisfied Are Women 6 Months after a Pessary Fitting for Pelvic Organ Prolapse? J Clin Med., 2022; 11(19): e5972.
29. NEMETH Z, et al. Self-management of vaginal cube pessaries may be a game changer for pelvic organ prolapse treatment: a long-term follow-up study. Int Urogynecol J., 2022; 22(1): 1–7.
30. ONTARIO HEALTH. Vaginal Pessaries for Pelvic Organ Prolapse or Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Health Technology Assessment. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2021; 21(3): 1-155.
31. OLIVER R, et al. A The history and usage of the vaginal pessary: a review. ejog, 2011; 156(2): 125-130.
32. PRADO DS, et al. Avaliação do impacto da correção cirúrgica de distopias genitais sobre a função sexual feminina. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet., 2007; 29(10): 519-524.
33. OLIVEIRA MS, et al. Validation of the Prolapse Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (P-QoL) in Portuguese version in Brazilian women. Tese, Universidade de São Paulo, 2017: 1-138. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2009; 20(10): 1191-202.
34. RADNIA N, et al. Patient Satisfaction and Symptoms Improvement in Women Using a Vginal Pessary for The Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse. J Med Life., 2019; 12(3): 271–275.
35. RODRIGUES AM, et al. Fatores de risco para o prolapso genital em uma população brasileira. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2009; 31(1):17-21.
36. SÁNCHEZ-SÁNCHEZ B, et al. Quality of Life in POP: Validity, Reliability and Responsiveness of the Prolapse Quality of Life Questionnaire (P-QoL) in Spanish Women. Int J Environ Res Public Health., 2020; 17(5): e1690.
37. THYS S, et al. Can we predict continued pessary use as primary treatment in women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (POP)? A prospective cohort study. Int Urogynecol J, 2021; 32(8): 2159-2167.
38. VAART LRVD, et al. Female Sexual Functioning in Women With a Symptomatic Pelvic Organ Prolapse; A Multicenter Prospective Comparative Study Between Pessary and Surgery. J Sex Med, 2022; 19(2): 270-2792.
39. XU H, et al. A predictive model of choosing pessary type for women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse. Menopause., 2021; 28(11): 1279–1286.
40. YANG J, et al. Ring and Gellhorn pessaries used in patients with pelvic organ prolapse: a retrospective study of 8 years. RCH Gynecol Obstet, 2018; 298(3): 623–629.
41. ZEIGER BB, et al. Vaginal pessary in advanced pelvic organ prolapse: impact on quality of life. Int Urogynecol J., 2022; 33(7): 2013–2020.
42. ZIV E e ERLICH E. Novel, disposable, self-inserted, vaginal device for the non-surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse: efficacy, safety, and quality of life. BMC Womens Health., 2022; 22(1): 459.
2. BELAYNEH T, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse surgery and health-related quality of life: a follow-up study. BMC Womens Health., 2021; 21(1): 1-4.
3. BODNER-ADLER B, et al. Prolapse surgery versus vaginal pessary in women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse: which factors influence the choice of treatment? Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019; 299(3): 773–777.
4. BRANDT C e VUUREN ECJV. Dysfunction, activity limitations, participation restriction and contextual factors in South African women with pelvic organ prolapse. S Afr J Physiother. 2019; 75(1): e933.
5. BROWN L, et al. Defining patient knowledge and perceptions of vaginal pessaries for prolapse and incontinence. Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg., 2016; 22(2): 93-97.
6. BUGGE C, et al. Pessaries (mechanical devices) for managing pelvic organ prolapse in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev., 2020; 11(11): CD004010.
7. BUMP RC, et al. The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1996; 175(1): 10-17.
8. CARRAMÃO S, et al. Estudo randômico da correção cirúrgica do prolapso uterino através de tela sintética de polipropileno tipo I comparando histerectomia versus preservação uterina. Rev. Col. Bras. Cir., 2009; 36(1): 65-72.
9. CARROLL L, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse: The lived experience. PLoS One., 2022; 17(11): e0276788.
10. COELHO SA, et al. Factors associated with the prescription of vaginal pessaries for pelvic organ prolapse. Clínicas (São Paulo), 2019; 74(1): e934.
11. COELHO S, et al. Quality of life and vaginal symptoms of postmenopausal women using pessary for pelvic organ prolapse: a prospective study. Rev Assoc Med Bra. 2018; 64(12): 1103-1107.
12. CONWAY CK, et al. Pelvic Organ Prolapse: A Review of In Vitro Testing of Pelvic Support Mechanisms. Ochsner J., 2020; 20(4): 410–418.
13. DELANCEY JO. Anatomic aspects of vaginal eversion after hysterectomy. Am J Obstet Gynecol., 1992; 166(6): 1717-1724.
14. DWYER L, et al. What is known from the existing literature about self-management of pessaries for pelvic organ prolapse? A scoping review. BMJ Open., 2022; 12(1): e055587.
15. ENIKEEV ME, et al. Repair of cystocele and apical genital prolapse using 6-strap mesh implant. Urologia, 2020; 87(3): 130-136.
16. FIGUEIRÊDO-NETTO O, et al. Colpopexia sacroespinhal: análise de sua aplicação em portadoras de prolapso uterovaginal e de cúpula vaginal pós-histerectomia. Rev. Bras. Gine Obstet., 2004; 26(10): 1-5.
17. FERNANDES ACN, et al. Conservative non-pharmacological interventions in women with pelvic floor dysfunction: a systematic review of qualitative studies. BMC Womens Health, 2022; 22(1): e515.
18. GHANBARI Z, et al. Quality of Life Following Pelvic Organ Prolapse Treatments in Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Clin Med., 2022; 11(23): 7166.
19. HAYLEN BT, et al. Erratum to: An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) / International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for female pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Int Urogynecol J. 2016; 27(2): 165-94.
20. KAMIńSKA A, et al. Reliability of the Polish Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire (PISQ-12) and Assessment of Sexual Function before and after Pelvic Organ Prolapse Reconstructive Surgery—A Prospective Study. J Clin Med., 2021; 10(18): e4167.
21. LASNEL MM, et al. Patient satisfaction and symptom changes in women using a pessary for pelvic organ prolapse. Prog Urol, 2020; 30(7): 381-389.
22. LINDER BJ, et al. Comparison of outcomes between pessary use and surgery for symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse: A prospective self-controlled study. Investig Clin Urol., 2022; 63(2): 214-220.
23. LONG J, et al. An estriol-eluting pessary to treat pelvic organ prolapse. Sci Rep., 2022; 12(1): e20021.
24. MANZINI C, et al. Parameters associated with unsuccessful pessary fitting for pelvic organ prolapse up to three months follow-up: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Urogynecol J., 2022; 33(7): 1719-1763.
25. MAO M, et al. Factors associated with long-term pessary use in women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse. Climacteric, 2019; 22(5): 478-482.
26. MCNEILL ER, et al. The impact on complication rates of delayed routine pessary reviews during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int Urogynecol J., 2022; 22(1): 1-7.
27. MELKIE TB, et al. Translation, reliability, and validity of Amharic versions of the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7). PLoS One, 2022; 17(11): e0270434.
28. NEBEL S, et al. How Satisfied Are Women 6 Months after a Pessary Fitting for Pelvic Organ Prolapse? J Clin Med., 2022; 11(19): e5972.
29. NEMETH Z, et al. Self-management of vaginal cube pessaries may be a game changer for pelvic organ prolapse treatment: a long-term follow-up study. Int Urogynecol J., 2022; 22(1): 1–7.
30. ONTARIO HEALTH. Vaginal Pessaries for Pelvic Organ Prolapse or Stress Urinary Incontinence: A Health Technology Assessment. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2021; 21(3): 1-155.
31. OLIVER R, et al. A The history and usage of the vaginal pessary: a review. ejog, 2011; 156(2): 125-130.
32. PRADO DS, et al. Avaliação do impacto da correção cirúrgica de distopias genitais sobre a função sexual feminina. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet., 2007; 29(10): 519-524.
33. OLIVEIRA MS, et al. Validation of the Prolapse Quality-of-Life Questionnaire (P-QoL) in Portuguese version in Brazilian women. Tese, Universidade de São Paulo, 2017: 1-138. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2009; 20(10): 1191-202.
34. RADNIA N, et al. Patient Satisfaction and Symptoms Improvement in Women Using a Vginal Pessary for The Treatment of Pelvic Organ Prolapse. J Med Life., 2019; 12(3): 271–275.
35. RODRIGUES AM, et al. Fatores de risco para o prolapso genital em uma população brasileira. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 2009; 31(1):17-21.
36. SÁNCHEZ-SÁNCHEZ B, et al. Quality of Life in POP: Validity, Reliability and Responsiveness of the Prolapse Quality of Life Questionnaire (P-QoL) in Spanish Women. Int J Environ Res Public Health., 2020; 17(5): e1690.
37. THYS S, et al. Can we predict continued pessary use as primary treatment in women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (POP)? A prospective cohort study. Int Urogynecol J, 2021; 32(8): 2159-2167.
38. VAART LRVD, et al. Female Sexual Functioning in Women With a Symptomatic Pelvic Organ Prolapse; A Multicenter Prospective Comparative Study Between Pessary and Surgery. J Sex Med, 2022; 19(2): 270-2792.
39. XU H, et al. A predictive model of choosing pessary type for women with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse. Menopause., 2021; 28(11): 1279–1286.
40. YANG J, et al. Ring and Gellhorn pessaries used in patients with pelvic organ prolapse: a retrospective study of 8 years. RCH Gynecol Obstet, 2018; 298(3): 623–629.
41. ZEIGER BB, et al. Vaginal pessary in advanced pelvic organ prolapse: impact on quality of life. Int Urogynecol J., 2022; 33(7): 2013–2020.
42. ZIV E e ERLICH E. Novel, disposable, self-inserted, vaginal device for the non-surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse: efficacy, safety, and quality of life. BMC Womens Health., 2022; 22(1): 459.