Suppr超能文献

产后盆底评估:应如何选择女性?

Pelvic floor assessment after delivery: how should women be selected?

作者信息

Soligo Marco, Livio Stefania, De Ponti Elena, Scebba Ileana, Carpentieri Federica, Serati Maurizio, Ferrazzi Enrico

机构信息

Department of Women, Mothers and Neonates, Buzzi Children's Hospital, ASST Fatebenefratelli Sacco, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.

Department of Women, Mothers and Neonates, Buzzi Children's Hospital, ASST Fatebenefratelli Sacco, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.

出版信息

Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2016 Nov;206:153-157. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.09.021. Epub 2016 Sep 21.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Pelvic floor dysfunction after delivery is quite common. New mothers deserve to receive targeted care for pelvic floor dysfunction, but how should women who are at risk be identified and selected for treatment? This study investigated risk factors and puerperal health-seeking behaviours to develop a restrictive patient selection model for postpartum pelvic floor dysfunction assessment.

STUDY DESIGN

This prospective observational study involved women who were at ≥32 weeks gestational age when they delivered in a tertiary referral maternity hospital in Milan, Italy, between July and December 2014. Eligible women were scheduled for a 3-month postnatal pelvic floor clinic. The adherence rate to the pelvic floor clinic and the prevalence of pelvic floor dysfunctions at 3 months postpartum were recorded. Univariable and logistic multivariable analyses were performed to select risk factors for pelvic floor dysfunctions. Risk factors were then tested for sensitivity and specificity for 3-month postpartum pelvic floor dysfunctions.

RESULTS

Of 1606 eligible women, 1293 (80.5%) were included in the analysis; 685 puerperal women (53.0%) adhered to the 3-month postnatal pelvic floor clinic; pelvic floor dysfunctions were detected in 238 women (34.7%). Four elements emerged as risk factors: symptoms before pregnancy (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.15-2.56; p=0.008), symptoms during pregnancy (OR 2.13, 95% CI 1.49-3.06; p<0.0001), vacuum extractor use (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.04-2.54; p=0.034), and severe perineal tears (OR 19.45, 95% CI 2.42-156.15; p=0.005). The combined sensitivity and specificity for the 4 risk factors were 82% and 39%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Internal risk factors analysis offers the potential to efficiently restrict patient selection for follow-up.

摘要

目的

产后盆底功能障碍十分常见。初为人母者理应接受针对盆底功能障碍的针对性护理,但应如何识别和挑选有风险的女性进行治疗呢?本研究调查了风险因素及产后寻求健康行为,以建立一个严格的患者选择模型用于产后盆底功能障碍评估。

研究设计

这项前瞻性观察性研究纳入了2014年7月至12月期间在意大利米兰一家三级转诊妇产医院分娩时孕周≥32周的女性。符合条件的女性被安排参加产后3个月的盆底门诊。记录盆底门诊的依从率以及产后3个月时盆底功能障碍的患病率。进行单变量和逻辑多变量分析以选择盆底功能障碍的风险因素。然后测试这些风险因素对产后3个月盆底功能障碍的敏感性和特异性。

结果

1606名符合条件的女性中,1293名(80.5%)纳入分析;685名产妇(53.0%)坚持参加产后3个月的盆底门诊;238名女性(34.7%)检测出盆底功能障碍。有四个因素成为风险因素:孕前症状(比值比1.72,95%置信区间1.15 - 2.56;p = 0.008)、孕期症状(比值比2.13,95%置信区间1.49 - 3.06;p < 0.0001)、使用真空吸引器(比值比1.62,95%置信区间1.04 - 2.54;p = 0.034)以及严重会阴撕裂(比值比19.45,95%置信区间2.42 - 156.15;p = 0.005)。这4个风险因素的综合敏感性和特异性分别为82%和39%。

结论

内部风险因素分析为有效限制随访患者的选择提供了可能。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验