A systematic review on reported outcomes and outcome measures in female idiopathic chronic pelvic pain for the development of a core outcome set

Association between pelvic pain bothersomeness and pain sensitivity: A community-based cross-sectional study of young adult females in the Raine Study

OBJECTIVE

Pelvic pain has been associated with augmented nociceptive processing, but large studies controlling for multiple potential confounding factors are lacking. This study investigated the association between pelvic pain bothersomeness and pain sensitivity in young adult women, accounting for potential confounding factors.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

Community-dwelling sample.

POPULATION

The Raine Study Gen2-22 year follow-up (n = 475).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The experience of bothersomeness related to pelvic pain was determined from a question in the Urogenital Distress Inventory short form. Pain sensitivity was measured using pressure pain and cold pain thresholds. Potential confounding factors included ethnicity, marital status, highest level of education, income, waist-hip ratio, level of activity, sleep quality, smoking, comorbidity history, C-reactive protein level, musculoskeletal pain experience and psychological distress.

RESULTS

Three hundred and sixty-two women (76.2%) reported no pelvic pain bothersomeness, 74 (15.6%) reported mild pelvic pain bothersomeness and 39 (8.2%) reported moderate-severe pelvic pain bothersomeness. After adjusting for marital status (and test site), moderate-severe pelvic pain bothersomeness was associated with a lower pressure pain threshold (i.e. greater pressure pain sensitivity) (coefficient -51.46, 95% CI -98.06 to -4.86, p = 0.030). After adjusting for smoking, moderate-severe pelvic pain bothersomeness was also associated with a higher cold pain threshold (i.e. greater cold pain sensitivity) (coefficient 4.35, 95% CI 0.90-7.79, p = 0.014).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests augmented nociceptive processing as a contributing factor in pelvic pain bothersomeness for some women. Thorough assessment of women who present clinically with pelvic pain should consider pain sensitivity as a potential contributing factor to their presentation.

A rapid systematic review of postpartum bladder care guidelines and recommendations in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic

New pathways for the management of postpartum voiding dysfunction and postpartum urinary retention should be considered to shorten hospital stays and promote early discharge during the COVID-19 pandemic. This rapid systematic review aimed to identify relevant national and international guidelines, and summarise available recommendations on postpartum bladder care that are relevant to women's care and management at the time of the pandemic. We searched Medline, Embase and Cochrane from inception till September 2021. Hand-searching of national and international specialist societies' websites was performed. We identified one international technical consultation, one international society's report of recommendations and two national guidelines. Guidelines stated that postnatal women should not be left more than 6 hours without voiding and assessed for postpartum urinary retention. As the cut-off of 150 ml for the diagnosis of significant postvoid residual volume is commonly used with no reported adverse outcomes, it could be beneficial to adopt this instead of 100 ml as further unnecessary interventions can be avoided. Such changes can reduce the number of women staying in the hospital. Clean intermittent self-catheterisation for the management of postpartum urinary retention could be considered as an option during the COVID-19 pandemic aiming to shorten hospital stays and avoid further attendances. Optimised bladder care has become more relevant during the coronavirus pandemic by striving towards self-care, community-based and remote care. We propose consideration of intermittent self-catheterisation in cases of postpartum urinary retention enabling self-care and avoidance of hospital visits.

Protocol for developing a core outcome set for male infertility research: an international consensus development study

STUDY QUESTION

We aim to develop, disseminate and implement a minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, for future male infertility research.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Research into male infertility can be challenging to design, conduct and report. Evidence from randomized trials can be difficult to interpret and of limited ability to inform clinical practice for numerous reasons. These may include complex issues, such as variation in outcome measures and outcome reporting bias, as well as failure to consider the perspectives of men and their partners with lived experience of fertility problems. Previously, the Core Outcome Measure for Infertility Trials (COMMIT) initiative, an international consortium of researchers, healthcare professionals and people with fertility problems, has developed a core outcome set for general infertility research. Now, a bespoke core outcome set for male infertility is required to address the unique challenges pertinent to male infertility research.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION

Stakeholders, including healthcare professionals, allied healthcare professionals, scientists, researchers and people with fertility problems, will be invited to participate. Formal consensus science methods will be used, including the modified Delphi method, modified Nominal Group Technique and the National Institutes of Health's consensus development conference.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS

An international steering group, including the relevant stakeholders outlined above, has been established to guide the development of this core outcome set. Possible core outcomes will be identified by undertaking a systematic review of randomized controlled trials evaluating potential treatments for male factor infertility. These outcomes will be entered into a modified Delphi method. Repeated reflection and re-scoring should promote convergence towards consensus outcomes, which will be prioritized during a consensus development meeting to identify a final core outcome set. We will establish standardized definitions and recommend high-quality measurement instruments for individual core outcomes.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

This work has been supported by the Urology Foundation small project award, 2021. C.L.R.B. is the recipient of a BMGF grant and received consultancy fees from Exscentia and Exceed sperm testing, paid to the University of Dundee and speaking fees or honoraria paid personally by Ferring, Copper Surgical and RBMO. S.B. received royalties from Cambridge University Press, Speaker honoraria for Obstetrical and Gynaecological Society of Singapore, Merk SMART Masterclass and Merk FERRING Forum, paid to the University of Aberdeen. Payment for leadership roles within NHS Grampian, previously paid to self, now paid to University of Aberdeen. An Honorarium is received as Editor in Chief of Human Reproduction Open. M.L.E. is an advisor to the companies Hannah and Ro. B.W.M. received an investigator grant from the NHMRC, No: GNT1176437 is a paid consultant for ObsEva and has received research funding from Ferring and Merck. R.R.H. received royalties from Elsevier for a book, consultancy fees from Glyciome, and presentation fees from GryNumber Health and Aytu Bioscience. Aytu Bioscience also funded MiOXYS systems and sensors. Attendance at Fertility 2020 and Roadshow South Africa by Ralf Henkel was funded by LogixX Pharma Ltd. R.R.H. is also Editor in Chief of Andrologia and has been an employee of LogixX Pharma Ltd. since 2020. M.S.K. is an associate editor with Human Reproduction Open. K.Mc.E. received an honoraria for lectures from Bayer and Pharmasure in 2019 and payment for an ESHRE grant review in 2019. His attendance at ESHRE 2019 and AUA 2019 was sponsored by Pharmasure and Bayer, respectively. The remaining authors declare no competing interests.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative registration No: 1586. Available at www.comet-initiative.org/Studies/Details/1586.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

N/A.

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT

N/A.

Outcome reporting in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the pharmacological management of idiopathic overactive bladder (OAB) in women; a systematic review for the development of core outcome sets (COS)

Introduction and hypothesis

Evidence on OAB management remains suboptimal and methodological limitations in randomized control trials (RCTs) affect their comparability. High quality meta-analyses are lacking. This study aimed to compare selection and reporting of outcomes and outcome measures across RCTs as well as evaluate methodological quality and outcome reporting quality as a first stage in the process of developing core outcome sets (COS).

Methods

RCTs were searched using Pubmed, EMBASE, Medline, Cochrane, ICTRP and Clinicaltrials.gov from inception to January 2020, in English language, on adult women. Pharmacological management, interventions, sample size, journal type and commercial funding were documented. Methodological and outcome reporting quality were evaluated using JADAD and MOMENT scores.

Results

Thirty-eight trials (18,316 women) were included. Sixty-nine outcomes were reported, using 62 outcome measures. The most commonly reported outcome domains were efficacy (86.8%), safety (73.7%) and QoL (60.5%). The most commonly reported outcomes in each domain were urgency urinary incontinence episodes (UUI) (52.6%), antimuscarinic side effects (76.3%) and change in validated questionnaire scores (36.8%).

A statistically significant correlation was found between JADAD and MOMENT (Spearman’s rho = 0.548, p < 0.05) scores. This indicates that higher methodological quality is associated with higher outcome reporting quality.

Conclusions

Development of COS and core outcome measure sets will address variations and lead to higher quality evidence. We recommend the most commonly reported outcomes in each domain, as interim COS. For efficacy we recommend: UUI episodes, urgency and nocturia episodes; for safety: antimuscarinic adverse events, other adverse events and discontinuation rates; for QoL: OAB-q, PPBC and IIQ scores.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00192-021-05040-1.

Developing Core Outcome Sets (COS) and Core Outcome Measures Sets (COMS) in Cosmetic Gynecological Interventions: Protocol for a Development and Usability Study

Background

Studies evaluating cosmetic gynecological interventions have followed variable methodology and reported a diversity of outcomes. Such variations limit the comparability of studies and the value of research-based evidence. The development of core outcome sets (COS) and core outcome measures sets (COMS) would help address these issues, ensuring a minimum of outcomes important to all stakeholders, primarily women requesting or having experienced cosmetic gynecological interventions.

Objective

This protocol describes the methods used in developing a COS and COMS for cosmetic gynecological interventions.

Methods

An international steering group within CHORUS, including health care professionals, researchers, and women with experience in cosmetic gynecological interventions from 4 continents, will guide the development of COS and COMS. Potential outcome measures and outcomes will be identified through comprehensive literature reviews. These potential COS and COMS will be entered into an international, multi-perspective web-based Delphi survey where Delphi participants judge which domains will be core. A priori thresholds for consensus will get established before each Delphi round. The Delphi survey results will be evaluated quantitatively and qualitatively in subsequent stakeholder group consensus meetings in the process of establishing “core” outcomes.

Results

Dissemination and implementation of the resulting COS and COMS within an international context will be promoted and reviewed.

Conclusions

This protocol presents the steps in developing a COS and COMS for cosmetic gynecological interventions. Embedding the COS and COMS for cosmetic gynecological interventions within future clinical trials, systematic reviews, and practice guidelines could contribute to enhancing the value of research and improving overall patient care.

Trial Registration

Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) 1592; https://tinyurl.com/n8faysuh

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/28032

Choice of primary and secondary outcomes in randomised controlled trials evaluating treatment for uterine fibroids: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Core outcome sets aim to reduce research heterogeneity and standardise reporting, allowing meaningful comparisons between studies.

OBJECTIVES

To report on outcomes used in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating uterine fibroid treatments, towards the development of a core outcome set for fibroid research.

SELECTION STRATEGY

Database search of MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE and CINAHL (inception to July 2021) for all English-language RCTs involving surgical or radiological fibroid treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

A total of 1885 texts were screened for eligibility by two reviewers independently according to PRISMA methodology. JADAD and Management of Otitis Media with Effusion in Cleft Palate (MOMENT) scores were used to assess methodological and outcome reporting quality of studies, respectively. Outcomes were mapped to nine domains. Non-parametric tests for correlation and to compare group medians were undertaken.

MAIN RESULTS

There were 23 primary outcomes (23 outcome measures) and 173 secondary outcomes (95 outcome measures) reported in 60 RCTs (5699 participants). The domains with highest frequency of primary outcomes reported were bleeding and quality of life (QoL). The most frequent primary outcomes were postoperative pain, QoL and menstrual bleeding. No primary outcomes were mapped to fertility domains. Median MOMENT outcome score was 5 (interquartile range 3). There was correlation between MOMENT outcome score and JADAD scores (r = 0.491, P = 0.0001), publishing journal impact factor (r = 0.419, P = 0.008) and publication year (r = 0.332, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

There is substantial variation in the outcomes reported in fibroid RCTs. There is a need for a core outcome set for fibroid research, to allow improved understanding regarding the effects of different treatments.

A meta-synthesis of qualitative studies on stress urinary incontinence in women for the development of a Core Outcome Set: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Given the high variation of perceptions of women with stress urinary incontinence (SUI), qualitative meta-synthesis in this field appears warranted. We aimed to synthesize evidence on women's experiences of SUI by analyzing qualitative data.

METHODS

A literature search of Medline, Embase, Scopus, PsycInfo, and CINAHL databases was performed by a CHORUS Working Group, from inception to August 2020. Qualitative studies on women's perspectives on SUI were included. Thematic analysis was used as a conceptual approach to analyze the data and develop a set of overarching themes. The quality of studies was assessed based on the Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included. Six themes encompassing women's perspectives on SUI emerged: experiencing SUI, awareness of SUI, treatments for SUI, sexuality, communication, and psychosocial effects. The quality appraisal of the studies showed good coherence.

CONCLUSION

This study revealed six overarching themes, of which treatment had the highest prevalence. Assessment of women's perceptions of SUI in the context of a qualitative meta-synthesis may inform policy and practice around this condition, may guide and help set research priorities, and will ideally contribute to the development of a Core Outcome Set for SUI.

Outcome reporting in trials on conservative interventions for pelvic organ prolapse: A systematic review for the development of a core outcome set

BACKGROUND

Significant risk of bias and limitations in outcome selections in trials evaluating conservative treatments for the management of Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP) have been highlighted and preclude comparability of outcomes, synthesis of primary studies and high quality evidence.

OBJECTIVES

As systematic review of the reported outcomes is the first step in the process of development of a Core Outcome Set (COS), we aimed to systematically review reporting of outcomes and outcome measures in Randomised Control Trials (RCTs) on conservative treatments for POP and develop an inventory of them for consideration as core outcome and outcome measures sets. We evaluated methodological quality, outcome reporting quality and publication characteristics and their associations among published RCTs.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review of RCTs identified from the following databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE and MEDLINE (Pubmed). RCTs evaluating the effectiveness of conservative interventions for the management of POP were considered for inclusion. Outcomes and outcome measures were obtained from the RCTs and an inventory was created. Outcomes were grouped in domains and themes. Methodological quality, outcome reporting quality and publication characteristics were evaluated and statistically analysed.

RESULTS

Twenty-five trials (3179 women) were included and reported 31 outcomes and 50 outcome measures. Reporting rates of the outcomes investigated ranged between 4% and 56%. The most commonly reported outcome domains were patient reported symptoms, stage of POP expressed as POP-Q stage, and quality of life. Univariate analysis demonstrated no significant correlations of methodological and outcome reporting parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a need to increase comparability of RCTs. Reporting standardized outcomes included in a COS for conservative interventions for POP will facilitate the comparability across RCTs. While the process of developing COS is in progress, we propose the interim use of the three most commonly reported outcomes in each domain: patient-reported outcomes (symptom distress including bowel and urinary symptoms, sexual function), stage of prolapse and quality of life parameters using validated questionnaires (Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20 (PFDI-20), Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire/Health related quality of life (PFIQ-7/HRQOL) and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Impact Questionnaire (POPIQ-7).

Systematic review and appraisal of clinical practice guidelines on pelvic organ prolapse using the AGREE II tool

AIMS

To systematically evaluate the content and quality of national and international clinical guidelines on pelvic organ prolapse (POP).

METHODS

We searched medical databases and organizations websites, to identify national and international guidelines on diagnosis and management of POP. Five authors independently assessed guidelines using the validated AGREE II tool. Its six domains include (1) scope and purpose, (2) stakeholder involvement, (3) rigor of development, (4) clarity of presentation, (5) applicability, and (6) editorial independence.

RESULTS

Eight guidelines met the inclusion criteria. Three hundred and thirteen different recommendations were identified. One hundred and ninety-nine recommendations were comparable across guidelines. Thirty-one recommendations were not supported by research evidence. Assessment by history and physical examination using the POP quantification system and consideration of imaging were recommendations featuring in all guidelines. Conservative treatment recommendations namely pelvic floor muscle training and vaginal pessaries were also found in all guidelines. Regarding surgical management, patient counseling, treating only symptomatic POP, consideration of apical fixation during surgical treatment, and use of biological or synthetic implants in recurrent cases were recommendations in all guidelines. Overall, the highest median scores were in the domains "scope and purpose" and "rigor of development". The lowest median score was for applicability (28.3%). Although the median score of "editorial independence" was high (85.4%), variability was also substantial (interquartile range: 12.5-100).

CONCLUSION

We identified variations in quality and deficiencies in certain areas, especially "applicability" and "editorial independence." Improvements in these key domains may enhance the quality and clinical impact of clinical practice guidelines.

Evaluation of clinical practice guidelines (CPG) on the management of female chronic pelvic pain (CPP) using the AGREE II instrument

Introduction and hypothesis

Variations in guidelines may result in differences in treatments and potentially poorer health-related outcomes. We aimed to systematically review and evaluate the quality of national and international guidelines and create an inventory of CPG recommendations on CPP.

Methods

We searched EMBASE and MEDLINE databases from inception till August 2020 as well as websites of professional organizations and societies. We selected national and international CPGs reporting on the diagnosis and management of female CPP. We included six CPGs. Five researchers independently assessed the quality of included guidelines using the AGREE II tool and extracted recommendations.

Results

Two hundred thirty-two recommendations were recorded and grouped into six categories: diagnosis, medical treatment, surgical management, behavioural interventions, complementary/alternative therapies and education/research. Thirty-nine (17.11%) recommendations were comparable including: a comprehensive pain history, a multi-disciplinary approach, attributing muscular dysfunction as a cause of CPP and an assessment of quality of life. Two guidelines acknowledged sexual dysfunction associated with CPP and recommended treatment with pelvic floor exercises and behavioural interventions. All guidelines recommended surgical management; however, there was no consensus regarding adhesiolysis, bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy during hysterectomy, neurectomy and laparoscopic uterosacral nerve ablation. Half of recommendations (106, 46.49%) were unreferenced or made in absence of good-quality evidence or supported by expert opinion. Based on the AGREE II assessment, two guidelines were graded as high quality and recommended without modifications (EAU and RCOG). Guidelines performed poorly in the “Applicability”, “Editorial Independence” and “Stakeholder Involvement” domains.

Conclusion

Majority of guidelines were of moderate quality with significant variation in recommendations and quality of guideline development.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00192-021-04848-1.

Patient-reported outcomes and outcome measures in childbirth perineal trauma research: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

In evaluating the effectiveness of interventions in perineal trauma research, outcomes reported by patients should have a prominent focus. There is no international consensus regarding the use of either patient-reported outcomes (PROs) or tools used to determine these outcomes (patient-reported outcome measures, PROMs). The objective was to evaluate the selection, reporting and geographical variations of PROs and PROMs in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on perineal trauma.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of RCTs in perineal trauma research evaluating outcome and outcome measure reporting. We identified PROs and PROMs and grouped PROs into domains and themes, a classification system based on a medical outcome taxonomy.

RESULTS

Of 48 included RCTs, 47 reported PROs. In total, we identified 51 PROs. Outcome reporting consistency was low, with 27 PROs reported only once. Nine PROs were reported more than five times, the most frequent being perineal pain, with no geographical variation in reporting. Four themes encompassing 12 domains were identified. The most frequently reported theme was "Clinical", with 25 PROs grouped within four domains. "Resource use" and "Adverse events" themes were rarely reported, with only five PROs. PROMs also exhibited variation. Most common were visual analogue scale (VAS; 100 mm), Cleveland Clinic Continence Score, The Faecal Incontinence Quality of Life scale, VAS (0-10) and the McGill Pain Questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant heterogeneity in PROs and PROMs was observed among RCTs. Despite inconsistency, PROs are the most prevalent outcome in perineal trauma research. Patient-reported adverse events are underreported. Their use in determining the effectiveness and safety of interventions makes their integration important in perineal trauma core outcome sets. Identification and grouping of outcomes will assist future core outcome consensus studies.

A meta-synthesis of qualitative literature on female chronic pelvic pain for the development of a core outcome set: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS

Qualitative research has an increasing role in the development of core outcome sets (COS) adding patient perspectives to the considerations of core outcomes. We aimed to identify priorities of women with experience of chronic pelvic pain (CPP).

METHODS

The search strategy was a systematic review of qualitative studies identified from Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycInfo databases. Selection criteria were qualitative studies exploring the experience of women with CPP. Two independent researchers extracted data and summarized findings using thematic analysis. A CERQual assessment was performed to assess the confidence of review findings.

RESULTS

We identified pertinent issues affecting women with CPP including the lack of holistic care, influence of psychosocial factors and the impact of pain on quality of life. Five meta-themes central to delivering a patient-centred approach were highlighted: acceptance of pain, quality of life, management of CPP, communication and support. Management of CPP was the most commonly reported meta-theme across seven studies and half of studies reported quality of life, management, communication and support. Quality appraisal of included studies identified only a single study that met all CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) criteria. There was high confidence in the evidence for acceptance of pain, quality of life and communication meta-themes.

CONCLUSION

Meta-themes revealed by this review should be considered as a priority and reflected in outcomes reported by future studies evaluating interventions for CPP. In addition, these themes should be considered by clinicians managing women with CPP.