International Urogynecology Journal

, Volume 21, Issue 5, pp 523–528 | Cite as

Validation of the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) for urogenital prolapse

  • Sushma Srikrishna
  • Dudley Robinson
  • Linda Cardozo
Original Article


Introduction and hypothesis

Currently, there is no global outcome assessment index in prolapse research. Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) has only been validated in incontinence. Our aim was to validate its use following prolapse surgery.


Women with prolapse were recruited from waiting lists and assessed objectively (pelvic organ prolapse quantification system (POP-Q)). Quality of life (QoL) was assessed with prolapse QoL questionnaire (pQoL). Patient goal achievement (visual analogue scale (VAS)) determined subjective satisfaction and PGI-I indicated overall satisfaction. We established construct validity of PGI-I by correlating final PGI-I response with other measures of response, measured at 1 year: (POP-Q/pQoL/VAS)


There was excellent test—retest reliability and correlation between PGI-I and other outcome measures.


We believe this is the first study validating PGI-I as a global index of response to prolapse surgery. This may be a valuable addition not only in clinical practice but also in trials comparing surgical interventions.


Construct validity Global index Outcome assessment Prolapse PGI-I Reliability 


Conflicts of interest

Sushma Srikrishna

Speaker Honorarium: Recordati

Consultant: Astellas

Travel grant to attend ICS: Boston Scientific, Recordati

Dudley Robinson

Consultant: Astellas, Ferring, Gynaecare, Uroplasty, Pfizer, Recordati, Novo-Nordisk

Speaker Honorarium: Astellas, Ferring, Gynaecare, Uroplasty, Pfizer, Recordati

Trial participation: Astellas, Pfizer

Linda Cardozo

Consultant: Astellas, Pfizer, Rottapharm, Schering-Plough

Speaker Honorarium: Astellas, Pfizer, Rottapharm, SCA

Trial Participation: Astellas, Pfizer, Bioexcell

Research grant: Pfizer


  1. 1.
    Swift SE (2000) The distribution of pelvic organ support in a population of female subjects seen for routine gynaecological health care. Am J Obstet Gynecol 183:277–285CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Swift SE, Woodman P, O'Boyle A et al (2005) Pelvic Organ Support Study (POSST): the distribution, clinical definition and epidemiology of pelvic organ support defects. Am J Obstet Gynecol 192:795–806CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Slieker-ten HMCP, Vierhout M, Bloembergen H, Schoenmaker G (2004) Distribution of pelvic organ prolapse in a general population: prevalence, severity, aetiology and relation with function of pelvic floor muscles. Abstract presented at the Joint Meeting of ICS and IUGA, 25–27 August 2004, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Berstrom VO, Colling JC, Clark AL (1997) Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 89:501–506CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Black N, Griffiths J, Pope C, Bowling A, Abel P (1997) Impact of surgery for stress incontinence on morbidity: cohort study. BMJ 315:1493–1498PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barber MD, Kuchibhatla MN, Pieper CF, Bump RC (2001) Psychometric evaluation of 2 comprehensive condition-specific quality of life instruments for women with pelvic floor disorders. Am J Obstet Gynecol 185:1388–1395CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rogers RG, Kammerer-Doak D, Villarreal A, Coates K, Qualls C (2001) A new instrument to measure sexual function in women with urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. Am J Obstet Gynecol 184:552–558CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yalcin I, Bump RC (2003) Validation of two global impression questionnaires for incontinence. Am J Obstet Gynecol 189(1):98–101CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Feinstein AR (1987) Global indexes and scales. Clinimatrics. Yale University Press, New Haven (CT), pp 267–316Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gill TM, Feinstein AR (1994) A critical appraisal of the quality of life measurements. JAMA 272:6619–6626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bump RC, Mattiasson A, Bo K et al (1996) The standardization of terminology of female pelvic organ prolapse and pelvic floor dysfunction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 175:10–17CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Digesu GA, Khullar V, Cardozo L, Robinson D, Salvatore S (2005) P-QoL: a validated questionnaire to assess the symptoms and quality of life of women with urogenital prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 16:176–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Guy W (1976) ECDEU assessment manual for psychopharmacology. Rockville (MD): National Institute of Mental health, US department of Health, Education and Welfare, p 217–222Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Oberg M, Wanstrom G, Hjertman H, Lunner T, Andersson G (2009) Development and initial validation of the 'Clinical Global Impression' to measure outcomes for audiological rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 19:1–9, Epub ahead of printGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Baron R, Mayoral V, Leijon G, Binder A, Steigerwald I, Serpell M (2009) Efficacy and safety of combination therapy with 5% lidocaine medicated plaster and pregabalin in post-herpetic neuralgia and diabetic polyneuropathy. Curr Med Res Opin 25:1677–1687CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jelovsek JE, Barber MD (2006) Women seeking treatment for advanced pelvic organ prolapse have decreased body image and quality of life. Am J Obstet Gynecol 294(5):1455–1461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Digesu GA, Chaliha C, Salvatore S, Hutchings A, Khullar VM (2005) The relationship of vaginal prolapse severity to symptoms and quality of life. BJOG 112(7):971–976CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kelleher CJ, Pleil AM, Reese PR, Burgess SM, Brodish PH (2004) How much is enough and who says so? Br J Obstet Gynaecol 111:605–612Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Srikrishna S, Robinson D, Cardozo L (2008) Is there a difference in patient and physician Quality Of Life evaluation in pelvic organ prolapse? Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct 19(4):517–520CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hullfish KL, Bovbjerg VE, Gibson J, Steers WD (2002) Patient centred goals for pelvic floor dysfunction surgery: what is success and is it achieved? Am J Obstet Gynaecol; 187:88–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hullfish KL, Bovbjerg VE, Steers WD (2004) Patient centred goals for pelvic floor dysfunction surgery: long-term follow up. Am J Obstet Gynaecol 191:201–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Rhys Williams G (2003) Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 56:395CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Urogynecological Association 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sushma Srikrishna
    • 1
  • Dudley Robinson
    • 1
  • Linda Cardozo
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of UrogynaecologyKing’s College HospitalLondonUK

Personalised recommendations