Individualised pelvic floor muscle training in women with pelvic organ prolapse (POPPY): A multicentre randomised controlled trial
Open accessAbstract
Background Pelvic organ prolapse is common and is strongly associated with childbirth and increasing age. Women with prolapse are often advised to do pelvic floor muscle exercises, but evidence supporting the benefits of such exercises is scarce. We aimed to establish the effectiveness of one-to-one individualised pelvic floor muscle training for reducing prolapse symptoms.Methods We did a parallel-group, multicentre, randomised controlled trial at 23 centres in the UK, one in New Zealand, and one in Australia, between June 22, 2007, and April 9, 2010. Female outpatients with newly-diagnosed, symptomatic stage I, II, or III prolapse were randomly assigned (1:1), by remote computer allocation with minimsation, to receive an individualised programme of pelvic floor muscle training or a prolapse lifestyle advice leaflet and no muscle training (control group). Outcome assessors, and investigators who were gynaecologists at trial sites, were masked to group allocation; the statistician was masked until after data analysis. Our primary endpoint was participants' self-report of prolapse symptoms at 12 months. Analysis was by intention-to-treat analysis. This trial is registered, number ISRCTN35911035.Findings 447 eligible patients were randomised to the intervention group (n=225) or the control group (n=222). 377 (84%) participants completed follow-up for questionnaires at 6 months and 295 (66%) for questionnaires at 12 months. Women in the intervention group reported fewer prolapse symptoms (ie, a significantly greater reduction in the pelvic organ prolapse symptom score [POP-SS]) at 12 months than those in the control group (mean reduction in POP-SS from baseline 3.77 [SD 5.62] vs 2.09 [5.39]; adjusted difference 1.52, 95% CI 0.46-2.59; p=0.0053). Findings were robust to missing data. Eight adverse events (six vaginal symptoms, one case of back pain, and one case of abdominal pain) and one unexpected serious adverse event, all in women from the intervention group, were regarded as unrelated to the intervention or to participation in the study.Interpretation One-to-one pelvic floor muscle training for prolapse is effective for improvement of prolapse symptoms. Long-term benefits should be investigated, as should the effects in specific subgroups.Funding Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates, New Zealand Lottery Board, and National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia).
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?
In Hagen et al.-14, there was a significantly greater decrease in POP symptoms at 6 and 12 months in the PFMT group (adjusted difference 1.52, 95% CI 0.46-2.59; p = 0.0053).
“Significantly greater decrease in POP symptoms at 6 and 12 months in PFMT group (mean reduction in POP-SS from baseline 3.77 [SD 5.62] vs 2.09 [5.39]; adjusted difference 1.52, 95% CI 0.46–2.59; p = 0.0053)”
From International urogynecology consultation chapter 3 committee 2; conservative treatment of patient with pelvic organ prolapse: Pelvic floor muscle training (2022) · cites this paper as [47]
In Hagen et al.-14, there was no significant difference between groups in proportion with improved POP stage (27% vs 20%, p = 0.10).
“No significant difference between groups in proportion with improved POP stage (27% vs 20%, p = 0.10)”
From International urogynecology consultation chapter 3 committee 2; conservative treatment of patient with pelvic organ prolapse: Pelvic floor muscle training (2022) · cites this paper as [47]
Eight studies found that PFMT improved bladder symptoms and five studies found improvement of anorectal symptoms in women with POP.
“Eight studies found that PFMT improved bladder symptoms [38, 39, 43, 44, 47, 60, 61, 74] and five studies found improvement of anorectal symptoms [39, 43, 44, 47, 61, 74].”
From International urogynecology consultation chapter 3 committee 2; conservative treatment of patient with pelvic organ prolapse: Pelvic floor muscle training (2022) · cites this paper as [47]
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 40 · Cited by 258
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Hagen S, Glazener C, Cook J, Herbison P, Toozs-Hobson P. Further properties of the pelvic organ prolapse symptom score: minimally important change and test-retest reliability. Neurourol Urodyn 2010; 29(6): 1055-1056.
- Ghroubi S, Kharrat O, Chaari M, Ben Ayed B, Guermazi M, Elleuch MH. Effect of conservative treatment in the management of low-degree urogenital prolapse. Annales de réadaptation et de médecine physique 2008;51:96-102.
- Authors
- Hagen, S., Stark, D., Glazener, C., Dickson, S., Barry, S., Elders, A., Frawley, H., Galea, M. P., Logan, J., McDonald, A., McPherson, G., Moore, K. H., Norrie, J., Walker, A., & Wilson, D.
- Affiliations
- Glasgow Caledonian University (GB)
- Leicester Royal Infirmary (GB)
- University of Aberdeen (GB)
- University of Glasgow (GB)
- The University of Melbourne (AU)
- The Royal Melbourne Hospital (AU)
- St George Hospital (AU)
- ORCID
- Venue
- The Lancet
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-03
- Volume
- 383
- Issue
- 9919
- Pages
- 796-806
- ISSN
- 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
- 0140-6736
- OpenAlex
- W2160626384
- Cited by
- 258
- References
- 40
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 18.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- Locations
- The Lancet (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- ResearchOnline (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
- Strathprints: The University of Strathclyde institutional repository (University of Strathclyde) (acceptedVersion)
- ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion)
- ResearchOnline (Glasgow Caledonian University) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
- Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Chief Scientist Office (CSO) (CZH/4/377)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Uterine Myomas and Treatments
- Keywords
- pelvic organ prolapse, pelvic floor muscle training, prolapse symptoms, POP-Q stage, lifestyle advice, women's health, exercise therapy, adverse events, vaginal symptoms, back pain, abdominal pain, aging
- MeSH terms
- Ambulatory Care, Exercise Therapy, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Treatment Outcome, Pelvic Floor, Pelvic Organ Prolapse, Precision Medicine
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