Women and healthcare providers' knowledge, attitudes and practice related to pessaries for pelvic organ prolapse: A Systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the knowledge, attitudes and practice of women and healthcare professionals in relation to pessary use for POP. METHOD: This systematic review was carried out in agreement with PRISMA recommendations. PubMed/MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Virtual Health Library, Web of Science, CAPES Periodicals and CINAHL databases were searched for studies without date or language limitations. Search strategies were developed for identifying studies examining knowledge, attitudes and practice toward vaginal pessaries use. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts to identify eligible studies. Data extraction was performed independently in duplicate into a standardized form. Quality of included studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute quality assessment tool. The protocol was registered with the PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews [CRD42018114236]. RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included. Knowledge and practice were the main domains investigated among patients and professionals, respectively. The results demonstrated poor patient knowledge; however, in urogynecologic patients, knowledge was better. Previous consultation with a Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery specialist (p = .001) and a higher level of education (p = .006) were associated with improved knowledge of pessary use. Fear of vaginal discharge, irritation, bleeding, and pain were factors that supported the decision not to use a pessary. Previous consultation with a generalist gynecologist (p = .03)and a lower level of education (p = .03) predicted aversion to pessary use. Providers demonstrated adequate knowledge and recommended pessary in 86.4% to 98.0% of cases. Having specialist and pessary management training were some factors that influenced a better attitude towards pessaries among health professionals. CONCLUSION: The knowledge, attitudes and practice of women and health care providers about pessary use are seldom investigated. Developing a psychometrically valid instrument for assessment of knowledge, attitudes and practice is desirable to examine the complex interactions between these three constructs, expose barriers to pessary care, and develop targeted educational interventions.

Knowledge, attitude, and practice instruments for urinary incontinence: A psychometric review.

AIMS: To analyze the psychometric properties of instruments measure knowledge and/or attitude and/or practice related to urinary incontinence (UI). METHODS: This review was conducted in September 2018 without restrictions regarding language and year of publication. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE/PubMed, CINAHL, SCOPUS, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane, LILACS, and Google. The psychometric properties were evaluated using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments and the Quality Criteria for Measurement Properties. RESULTS: A total of seven articles published between 1999 and 2018 were included. The evaluation of the psychometric properties showed that the majority of the instruments presented "excellent" or "good" methodological quality; however, the description of aspects related to the validation stages was inadequate in some studies, causing the quality of the results to be evaluated as "indeterminate" in some properties. This review cannot recommend any questionnaire without reservations; however, the Urinary Incontinence Scales and the Barriers Incontinence Care Seeking Questionnaire presented better evaluations, regarding both methodological quality and the quality of the results. CONCLUSION: This review provides a strategy to select the most suitable instrument to assess knowledge, attitude, and practice regarding UI, according to the psychometric properties, guiding their use by researchers in clinical practice.