The UK National Prolapse Survey: 10 years on
Open accessAbstract
INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: To assess trends in the surgical management of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) amongst UK practitioners and changes in practice since a previous similar survey. METHODS: An online questionnaire survey (Typeform Pro) was emailed to British Society of Urogynaecology (BSUG) members. They included urogynaecologists working in tertiary centres, gynaecologists with a designated special interest in urogynaecology and general gynaecologists. The questionnaire included case scenarios encompassing contentious issues in the surgical management of POP and was a revised version of the questionnaire used in the previous surveys. The revised questionnaire included additional questions relating to the use of vaginal mesh and laparoscopic urogynaecology procedures. RESULTS: Of 516 BSUG members emailed, 212 provided completed responses.. For anterior vaginal wall prolapse the procedure of choice was anterior colporrhaphy (92% of respondents). For uterovaginal prolapse the procedure of choice was still vaginal hysterectomy and repair (75%). For posterior vaginal wall prolapse the procedure of choice was posterior colporrhaphy with midline fascial plication (97%). For vault prolapse the procedure of choice was sacrocolpopexy (54%) followed by vaginal wall repair and sacrospinous fixation (41%). The laparoscopic route was preferred for sacrocolpopexy (62% versus 38% for the open procedure). For primary prolapse, vaginal mesh was used by only 1% of respondents in the anterior compartment and by 3% in the posterior compartment. CONCLUSION: Basic trends in the use of native tissue prolapse surgery remain unchanged. There has been a significant decrease in the use of vaginal mesh for both primary and recurrent prolapse, with increasing use of laparoscopic procedures for prolapse.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The preferred surgical approach for uterine prolapse amongst many urogynaecologists remains vaginal hysterectomy with apical suspension.
“The preferred surgical approach for uterine prolapse amongst many urogynaecologists remains vaginal hysterectomy (VH) with apical suspension [3], recognising the association between the more common anterior wall prolapse and apical descent [3, 4].”
From Laparoscopic sacrohysteropexy versus vaginal hysterectomy and apical suspension: 7-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial (2022) · cites this paper as [3]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 17 · Cited by 102
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [14]Scottish Government. The Scottish independent review of the use, safety and efficacy of transvaginal mesh implants in the treatment of stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in women, final report. Edinburgh: Scottish Government; 2017.
- Authors
- Jha, S., Cutner, A., & Moran, P.
- Affiliations
- Jessop Hospital (GB)
- University College London (GB)
- Worcestershire Royal Hospital (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Jha, Swati
- ORCID
- Jha, Swati
- Venue
- International Urogynecology Journal
- Published
- 2017-09-15
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 795-801
- ISSN
- 0937-3462 (ISSN-L)
- 1433-3023
- PMC
- PMC5948287
- OpenAlex
- W2091903888
- Cited by
- 102
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 10.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Urogynecology Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed
- Funders
- University of Sheffield
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Uterine Myomas and Treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hernia repair and management
- Keywords
- pelvic organ prolapse, surgical management trends, anterior colporrhaphy, posterior colporrhaphy, vaginal hysterectomy, sacrocolpopexy, vaginal mesh, vaginal vault prolapse
- MeSH terms
- Female, United Kingdom, Gynecology, Humans, Middle Aged, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Physicians, Pilot Projects, Surveys and Questionnaires, Gynecologic Surgical Procedures, Surgical Mesh, Uterine Prolapse, Treatment Outcome, Health Care Surveys, Pelvic Organ Prolapse
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review