Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Factors influencing long-term pessary use

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Urogynecology Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis

We aimed to identify factors contributing to successful pessary use for over 1 year.

Methods

A chart review was conducted composed of 150 women at Montefiore Medical Center, using a pessary for over 1 year. Characteristics of those who continued pessary usage were compared with those who discontinued use by using Chi-square, Fisher’s exact test, logistic regression model, receiver–operator characteristic curve, and Kaplan–Meier survival curves.

Results

Thirty-five women (23%) discontinued using pessaries (DP) after a year, while 115 women (77%) continued (CP). There was no difference in multiple characteristics. The DP group had more patients with stress incontinence, p = 0.17. Older age at pessary insertion showed higher continued use (OR = 1.083, CI: 1.033–1.136). Patients with a history of prolapse repair surgery were more likely to discontinue pessary use.

Conclusions

Age greater than 72 years was associated with continued pessary use and history of hysterectomy or prolapse surgery, and stress incontinence were associated with discontinuation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Subak LL, Waetjen LE, Van den Eaden S, Thom DH, Vittinghoff E, Brown JS (2001) Cost of pelvic organ prolapse surgery in the United States. Obstet Gynecol 98:646–651

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Olsen AL, Smith VJ, Bergstrom JO, Colling JC, Clark AL (1997) Epidemiology of surgically managed pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence. Obstet Gynecol 89:501–506

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Clemons JL, Aguilar VC, Tillinghast TA, Jackson ND, Myers DL (2004) Risk factors associated with an unsuccessful pessary fitting trial in women with pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 190:345–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Mutone MF, Terry C, Hale DS, Benson JT (2005) Factors which influence the short-term success of pessary management of pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 193:89–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hanson LA, Schulz JA, Flood CG, Cooley B, Tam F (2006) Vaginal pessaries in managing women with pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence: patient characteristics and factors contributing to success. Int Urogynecol J 17:155–159

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Maito JM, Quam ZA, Craig E, Danner KA, Rogers RG (2006) Predictors of successful pessary fitting and continued use in a nurse–midwifery pessary clinic. J Midwifery Women’s Health 51:78–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Powers K, Lazarou G, Wang A, LaCombe J, Bensinger G, Greston WM et al (2006) Pessary use in advanced pelvic organ prolapse. Int Urogynecol J 17:160–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Heit M, Rosenquist C, Culligan P, Graham C, Murphy M, Shott S (2003) Predicting treatment choice for patients with pelvic organ prolapse. Obstet Gynecol 101:1279–1284

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Clemons JL, Aguilar VC, Sokol ER, Jackson ND, Myers DL (2004) Patient characteristics that are associated with continued pessary use versus surgery after 1 year. Obstet Gynecol 191:159–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Brincat C, Kenton K, Fitzgerald MP, Brubaker L (2004) Sexual activity predicts continued pessary use. Obstet Gynecol 191:198–200

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah Friedman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Friedman, S., Sandhu, K.S., Wang, C. et al. Factors influencing long-term pessary use. Int Urogynecol J 21, 673–678 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-009-1080-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-009-1080-x

Keywords

Navigation