Abstract
Abstract
Introduction and Hypothesis
Currently, little is known about how daily self-management of cube pessaries influences sexual function. We hypothesized that removing the cube pessary prior to sexual activity did not negatively influence the sexual function, and pessary self-care did not lead to a deterioration of sexual wellbeing.
Methods
We conducted a planned secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study in which 214 patients with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse (stage 2+) were enrolled (2015). Each patient was size fitted with a cube pessary and completed a questionnaire online or by phone ≥ 5 years after her initial fitting. Changes in quality of life were measured using the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I).
Results
Of the 143 women included in our analyses, 92 (64.3%) were sexually active during the study period. These patients (73.9%; 68 out of 92) described their sexual wellbeing as “better” or “much better” than their pretreatment status. Sexually active patients had a better quality of life as measured by the PGI-I than the sexually inactive patients. Of the sexually active patients, 91.3% (84 out of 92) described their condition as “better” or “much better” than their pretreatment status, whereas 84.3% (43 out of 51) of the sexually inactive patients reported the same improvement. Over 90% of sexually active patients reported that removal of the vaginal cube pessary before sexual activity is not disruptive.
Conclusions
The overwhelming majority of the patients with symptomatic pelvic organ prolapse using daily self-management of cube pessaries reported that removal of the vaginal cube pessary before sexual activity is not disruptive, and its use was accompanied by improved sexual wellbeing.
Funder
Nemzeti Fejlesztési Ügynökség
University of Pécs
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference29 articles.
1. DeLancey JOL. What’s new in the functional anatomy of pelvic organ prolapse? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2016;28(5):420–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/GCO.0000000000000312.
2. Jelovsek JE, Barber MD. Women seeking treatment for advanced pelvic organ prolapse have decreased body image and quality of life. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194:1455–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2006.01.060.
3. Smith FJ, Holman CD, Moorin RE, Tsokos N. Lifetime risk of undergoing surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;116:1096. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181f73729.
4. Rogers RG, Fashokun, Brubaker L, Eckler K. Pelvic organ prolapse in women: epidemiology, risk factors, clinical manifestations, and management. Update. 2021. https://blog.utp.edu.co/maternoinfantil/files/2012/04/Distopias.pdf. Accessed Nov 2023.
5. Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL. Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol. 1997;89:501. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-7844(97)00058-6.