Patient-reported outcomes and quality of life after pelvic organ prolapse surgery in Indonesia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.13181/mji.oa.258009Keywords:
patient-reported outcomes, pelvic floor disability inventory, pelvic floor impact questionnaire, pelvic organ prolapse, quality of lifeAbstract
BACKGROUND Pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is a common condition in older women that significantly impacts quality of life (QoL). Traditional surgical success measures primarily focus on anatomical outcomes, but patient-reported outcomes provide offer a more comprehensive assessment of symptom relief and overall well-being. This study aimed to evaluate patient-reported outcomes and QoL with the Pelvic Floor Disability Index (PFDI-20) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7) following POP surgery.
METHODS This cross-sectional study analyzed secondary data from medical records and patient interviews at Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Jakarta. Patients diagnosed with POP who underwent surgery were followed up at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7 scores were used to assess symptom impact and QoL.
RESULTS Among 34 patients, the most common surgical method was total vaginal hysterectomy (79%), followed by colpocleisis (59%), and sacrospinous hysteropexy (6%). Postoperative PFDI-20 scores showed 76% of patients experienced minimal to no impact, while PFIQ-7 scores indicated 91% reported minimal to no impact on their QoL. 2 patients reported moderate impact, particularly in the urinary domain. No patients experienced severe or very severe impairment at any follow-up interval.
CONCLUSIONS Incorporating patient-reported outcomes with anatomical assessments provides a more accurate evaluation of surgical success in POP based on PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7 scores. Because POP is a multidimensional condition, assessing surgical outcomes requires a multimodal approach that considers symptom relief and QoL.
Downloads
References
Aboseif C, Liu P. Pelvic organ prolapse. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island: StatPearls Publishing; 2022. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK563229/.
Weintraub AY, Glinter H, Marcus-Braun N. Narrative review of the epidemiology, diagnosis and pathophysiology of pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2022;33(12):3113-9. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1677-5538.ibju.2018.0581
Wang B, Chen Y, Zhu X, Wang T, Li M, Huang Y, et al. Global burden and trends of pelvic organ prolapse associated with aging women: an observational trend study from 1990 to 2019. Front Public Health. 2022;10:975829. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.975829
World Health Organization (WHO). Ageing and health [Internet]. World Health Organization (WHO); 2024 [cited 2024 May 8]. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/ageing-and-health.
Fakhrizal E, Rustam RP, Maryuni SW. The prevalence of pelvic organ prolapse in coastal community from Riau province. Proceedings of 4th Riau Medical Scientific and Expo 2022 Riau, Indonesia. 2022. p. 114-8.
Kapoor DS, Thakar R, Sultan AH, Oliver R. Conservative versus surgical management of prolapse: what dictates patient choice? Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2009;20(10):1157-61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-009-0930-x
Li C, Gong Y, Wang B. The efficacy of pelvic floor muscle training for pelvic organ prolapse: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Urogynecol J. 2016;27(7):981-92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-015-2846-y
Coolen AW, Troost S, Mol BW, Roovers JP, Bongers MY. Primary treatment of pelvic organ prolapse: pessary use versus prolapse surgery. Int Urogynecol J. 2018;29(1):99-107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-017-3372-x
Manonai J, Sarit-Apirak S, Udomsubpayakul U. Vaginal ring pessary use for pelvic organ prolapse: continuation rates and predictors of continued use. Menopause. 2018;26(6):665-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/GME.0000000000001277
Pizzoferrato AC, Thuillier C, Vénara A, Bornsztein N, Bouquet S, Cayrac M, et al. Management of female pelvic organ prolapse-Summary of the 2021 HAS guidelines. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2023;52(3):102535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogoh.2023.102535
Chan CY, Fernandes RA, Yao HH, O'Connell HE, Tse V, Gani J. A systematic review of the surgical management of apical pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J. 2023;34(4):825-41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-022-05408-x
Ko KJ, Lee KS. Current surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse: strategies for the improvement of surgical outcomes. Investig Clin Urol. 2019;60(6):413-24. https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.2019.60.6.413
Barber MD, Brubaker L, Nygaard I, Wheeler TL 2nd, Schaffer J, Chen Z, et al. Defining success after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;114(3):600−9. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181b2b1ae
Nuring P, Iman SB, Denny A, Ova E. Validation test of Indonesian pelvic floor distress inventory-20 (Indonesian PFDI-20). J Med Sci. 2020;52(2):131−7. https://doi.org/10.19106/JMedSci005202202004
Hakim S, Maharani CR. Changes in quality of life score of patients with pelvic organ prolapse after vaginal surgery measured by Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI‑20) and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ‑7) questionnaires. Indones J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;5(3):164-7. https://doi.org/10.32771/inajog.v5i3.545
Majdina NI, Pratikno B, Tripena A. [Determination of sample size using the Bernoulli and Slovin formulas: concepts and applications]. Jurnal Ilmiah Matematika dan Pendidikan Matematika. 2024;16(1):73-84. Indonesian. https://doi.org/10.20884/1.jmp.2024.16.1.11230
Barber MD, Walters MD, Bump RC. Short forms of two condition-specific quality-of-life questionnaires for women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7). Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005;193(1):103-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2004.12.025
de Arruda GT, de Andrade DF, Virtuoso JF. Internal structure and classification of pelvic floor dysfunction distress by PFDI-20 total score. J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2022;6(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-022-00459-6
Belayneh T, Gebeyehu A, Adefris M, Rortveit G, Gjerde JL, Ayele TA. Pelvic organ prolapse surgery and health-related quality of life: a follow-up study. BMC Womens Health. 2021;21(1):4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-020-01146-8
Richter HE, Goode PS, Kenton K, Brown MB, Burgio KL, Kreder K, et al. The effect of age on short-term outcomes after abdominal surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007;55(6):857−63. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.2007.01178.x
Ghanbari Z, Ghaemi M, Shafiee A, Jelodarian P, Hosseini RS, Pouyamoghaddam S, 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. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11237166
Ismail SI, Rizk DE. Urinary, bowel and sexual symptoms after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. In: Li Marzi V, Serati M, editors. Management of pelvic organ prolapse. Urodynamics, neurourology and pelvic floor dysfunctions. Cham: Springer; 2018. p. 167-72. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59195-7_14
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Surahman Hakim, Valencia Hadinata, Igor Ian Wiguna, Kevin Tanoto, Safira Amelia, Adib Kamil Putra Kadarusman
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Medical Journal of Indonesia agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant Medical Journal of Indonesia right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License that allows others to remix, adapt, build upon the work non-commercially with an acknowledgment of the work’s authorship and initial publication in Medical Journal of Indonesia.
- Authors are permitted to copy and redistribute the journal's published version of the work non-commercially (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in Medical Journal of Indonesia.
