Prevalence of symptoms of pelvic floor dysfunction among women (according to a medical and sociological study)
Heading: public health Article type: Original article
Authors: Pauzina О.A., Abaeva O.P., Romanov S.V., Evdokimova K.V.
Organization: First Moscow State Medical University n.a. I.M. Sechenov, Volga District Medical Center of FMBA
Abstract. Objective: to identify the prevalence of symptoms characteristic of pelvic floor dysfunction among women working at an enterprise in a large industrial region, and to assess the impact of medical and social factors on the frequency of their occurrence. Material and methods. Respondents (317 women aged 20 to 69) were asked to assess the presence of the most common symptoms of pelvic floor dysfunction on a scale of four levels: never; several times a month; several times a week; almost daily or every time an event occurs. Results. Involuntary leakage of urine was noted by 37.4±2.7%, weak pressure or intermittent flow during urination — 20.0±2.2%, unpleasant sensations during sexual intercourse — 19.9±2.2%, a feeling of dryness and discomfort in the vagina — 13.6±1.9% of the survey participants. The presence of a statistically significant relationship between the frequency of urinary incontinence symptoms and age, an increase in body mass index, low physical activity, the presence of independent childbirth; between the frequency of intermittent jet during urination, a feeling of discomfort in the vagina and the age of women; between the frequency of discomfort in the vagina and the presence of physical exertion at work. Conclusions. The results of the study indicate that women working at an industrial enterprise, among the symptoms characteristic of pelvic floor dysfunction, most often there is involuntary leakage of urine, noted by more than a third of the survey participants. Taking into account the statistically proven influence of such medical and social factors as age and high body mass index on the frequency of symptoms of pelvic floor dysfunction, it is these groups of patients who are prioritized for active detection of pelvic floor dysfunction by obstetricians and gynecologists during preventive examinations.
Bibliography:
1. Rovner ES. Pelvic organ prolapse: a review. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2000; 46 (12): 24-37.
2. Maher C, Baessler K, Glazener CM, et al. Surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse in women: a short version Cochrane review. Neurourol Urodyn. 2008; 27 (1): 3-12.
3. Doumouchtsis SK, Chrysanthopoulou EL. Urogenital consequences in ageing women. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gy-naecol. 2013; 27 (5): 699-714.
4. Hampton BS. Pelvic organ prolapse. Med Health R I. 2009; 92(1): 5-9.
5. Weber AM, Richter HE. Pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol. 2005; 106 (3): 615-34.
6. d'Altilia N, Mancini V, Falagario U, et al. Are two meshes better than one in sacrocolpopexy for pelvic organ prolapse? Comparison of single anterior versus anterior and posterior vaginal mesh procedures. Urol Int. 2021; (26): 1-9.
7. Mearini L, Nunzi E, Di Biase M, et al. Laparoscopic management of vaginal vault prolapse recurring after pelvic organ prolapse surgery. Urol Int. 2016; (97): 158-64.
8. Lologaeva MS, Aryutin DG, Orazov MR, et al. Pelvic organ prolapse in XXI century. Obstetrics and gynecology. News. Views. Education. 2019; 7 (3): 76-82.
9. Remnyova OV, Ivanyuk IS, Galchenko AS. Pelvic floor dysfunction in women: current understanding of the problem. Fundamental and Clinical Medicine. 2022; 7 (1): 92-101.
10. Lukianova KD, Mikhelson АА, Melkozerova ОА, et al. Pelvic floor dysfunction is an old problem that requires modern solutions. Disease Treatment and Prevention. 2020; 10 (1): 66-72.
Attachment | Size |
---|---|
2022_4_585-589.pdf | 548.56 KB |