Cited by 90Pelvic floor disorders treatmentsSexual function and dysfunction studiesPregnancy-related medical research

Pelvic floor muscle training for secondary prevention of pelvic organ prolapse (PREVPROL): a multicentre randomised controlled trial

Open access
Hagen, Suzanne, Glazener, Cathryn, McClurg, Doreen, Macarthur, Christine, Elders, Andrew, Herbison, Peter, Wilson, Don, Toozs-Hobson, Philip +5 more·2017·The Lancet

Abstract

Background Pelvic floor muscle training can reduce prolapse severity and symptoms in women seeking treatment. We aimed to assess whether this intervention could also be effective in secondary prevention of prolapse and the need for future treatment.Methods We did this multicentre, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial at three centres in New Zealand and the UK. Women from a longitudinal study of pelvic floor function after childbirth were potentially eligible for inclusion. Women of any age who had stage 1-3 prolapse, but had not sought treatment, were randomly assigned (1:1), via remote computer allocation, to receive either one-to-one pelvic floor muscle training (five physiotherapy appointments over 16 weeks, and annual review) plus Pilates-based pelvic floor muscle training classes and a DVD for home use (intervention group), or a prolapse lifestyle advice leaflet (control group). Randomisation was minimised by centre, parity (three or less vs more than three deliveries), prolapse stage (above the hymen vs at or beyond the hymen), and delivery method (any vaginal vs all caesarean sections). Women and intervention physiotherapists could not be masked to group allocation, but allocation was masked from data entry researchers and from the trial statistician until after database lock. The primary outcome was self-reported prolapse symptoms (Pelvic Organ Prolapse Symptom Score [POP-SS]) at 2 years. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01171846.Findings Between Dec 21, 2008, and Feb 24, 2010, in New Zealand, and Oct 27, 2010, and Sept 5, 2011, in the UK, we randomly assigned 414 women to the intervention group (n=207) or the control group (n=207). One participant in each group was excluded after randomisation, leaving 412 women for analysis. At baseline, 399 (97%) women had prolapse above or at the level of the hymen. The mean POP-SS score at 2 years was 3·2 (SD 3·4) in the intervention group versus 4·2 (SD 4·4) in the control group (adjusted mean difference -1·01, 95% CI -1·70 to -0·33; p=0·004). The mean symptom score stayed similar across time points in the control group, but decreased in the intervention group. Three adverse events were reported, all of which were in the intervention group (one women had a fall, one woman had a pain in her tail bone, and one woman had chest pain and shortness of breath).Interpretation Our study shows that pelvic floor muscle training leads to a small, but probably important, reduction in prolapse symptoms. This finding will be important for women and caregivers considering preventive strategies.Funding Wellbeing of Women charity, the New Zealand Continence Association, and the Dean's Bequest Fund of Dunedin School of Medicine.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0140-6736(16)32109-2

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Two studies of pelvic floor muscle training for pelvic organ prolapse focused on secondary prevention by including women who had not sought health care for assessment or treatment of the condition.

    “two studies focused on secondary prevention, as they included women who had not sought health care for assessment or treatment of the condition [37, 38]”

    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 [37]

    The paper’s title identifies PREVPROL as a trial of pelvic floor muscle training for secondary prevention of pelvic organ prolapse (title; Lancet pp. 393–402). The passages available from our copy do not establish that its participants had not sought health care for assessment or treatment; searches for that recruitment detail did not find it. This citation can substantiate one study, not independently establish the other study in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Both Wiegersma et al. (2014) and Hagen et al. (2017) found statistically significant positive short-term effects on symptoms of POP, but not on POP-Q stage.

    “Both studies found statistically significant positive short-term effects on symptoms of POP, but not on POP-Q stage.”

    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 [37]

    The Abstract reports significantly lower prolapse symptom scores in the intervention group at two years (p=0.004), supporting the symptom-effect portion for Hagen et al. Our copy does not report a comparison of POP-Q stage or establish the claimed short-term effect; searches for POP-Q and anatomical stage found no relevant passage. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The two included studies on secondary prevention in the review showed some benefit, but the effects were not that convincing.

    “The results of these RCTs showed some benefit, but the effects were not that convincing [37, 38].”

    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 [37]

    The Abstract reports a small reduction in prolapse symptoms in this trial, supporting the claim of some benefit. It describes the reduction as statistically significant and “probably important,” so it does not support the citing sentence’s characterization of the effect as unconvincing. This source reports one trial, not the results of both cited RCTs. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In Hagen et al.-17, the mean POP-SS score at 2 years was 3.2 (SD 3.4) in intervention vs 4.2 (SD 4.4) in control (adjusted mean difference −1.01, 95% CI −1.70 to −0.33; p = 0.004).

    “The mean POP-SS score at 2 years was 3·2 (SD 3·4) in the intervention group versus 4·2 (SD 4·4) in the control group (adjusted mean difference −1·01, 95% CI −1·70 to −0·33; p = 0·004)”

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 33 · Cited by 90

Authors
Hagen, S., Glazener, C., McClurg, D., Macarthur, C., Elders, A., Herbison, P., Wilson, D., Toozs-Hobson, P., Hemming, C., Hay-Smith, J., Collins, M., Dickson, S., & Logan, J.
Affiliations
  • Glasgow Caledonian University (GB)
  • University of Aberdeen (GB)
  • University of Birmingham (GB)
  • University of Otago (NZ)
  • Birmingham Women's Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Hagen, Suzanne
Venue
The Lancet
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-01
Volume
389
Issue
10067
Pages
393-402
ISSN
  • 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
  • 0140-6736
OpenAlex
W2566475610
Cited by
90
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 1
FWCI
7.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ResearchOnline (Glasgow Caledonian University) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (WMCLAHRC-2014-1)
  • Wellbeing of Women (RG1271)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Pelvic floor disorders treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Pregnancy-related medical research
Keywords
pelvic floor muscle training, pelvic organ prolapse, secondary prevention, prolapse symptoms, pelvic floor physiotherapy, lifestyle advice, childbirth, parity, cesarean section, women's health
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Middle Aged, New Zealand, Parity, Treatment Outcome, Pelvic Floor, Physical Therapy Modalities, Secondary Prevention, 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