Pizzoferrato AC, Laventure M, Fritel X, Blanchard V, Deparis J. Development of an educational program in pelvic floor health for women: A consensus using the Delphi method.
THE FRENCH JOURNAL OF UROLOGY 2024;
34:102792. [PMID:
39433131 DOI:
10.1016/j.fjurol.2024.102792]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/03/2024] [Revised: 10/15/2024] [Accepted: 10/16/2024] [Indexed: 10/23/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
Pelvic floor health education workshops for women appear to improve women's knowledge and pelvic floor symptoms. Our aim was to obtain expert consensus on the content and format of a pelvic floor health education program using the Delphi method.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A two-round Delphi study was conducted involving French-speaking multidisciplinary experts in pelvic floor dysfunction management. The first round questionnaire contained 44 items (31 about the program's content and 13 about the materials). They were also consulted about the optimal format of the program (duration and number of workshops) as open questions. Participants rated their level of agreement with each item on a Likert scale from 1-9. Consensus was defined by a level of agreement≥80% and a median≥7. Non-consensus items were reworked and resubmitted to the experts for the second round.
RESULTS
Of the 110 experts contacted, 52 responded for the first and second rounds. Sixty-one percent of the proposed items met with consensus in the first round and 60% in the second. The final program comprises 33 items: eight on anatomy, four on biomechanics, nine on urinary and defecatory physiology, seven on risk factors, and five on materials. The format selected by the experts consisted of four or five 75-minute health education sessions with a paper summary hand out at the end of the program.
CONCLUSIONS
This study defined the content of a pelvic floor health education program for the general population of adult women validated by a consensus of experts. After validation of an English version, it should be evaluated in international interventional studies.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
LE5 (expert opinion).
Collapse