Volume : 4
Issue : 2
Online ISSN : 2394-2754
Print ISSN : 2394-2746
Article First Page : 166
Article End Page : 170
Background: The commonly used methods of classifying or grading for the pelvic organ prolapse are qualitative and subjective with high interobserver and intraobserver variations. This absence of standardization prevents meaningful comparisons of the published series, surgical results, effective communications among clinicians and longitudinal comparison in an individual case.
Aim of this study was to determine the association between the standardized pelvic organ prolapse quantification system (POP Q) and Shaw’s system of classification of pelvic organ prolapse.
Materials and Methods: This was an observational study in which 100 cases of pelvic organ prolapse, whose average age was 47+/- 10 years, underwent two system of examinations- POP Q System and Shaws’s system of classification at Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel hospital associated with Lala Lajpat Rai Memorial Medical College Meerut by five gynaecologists by randomization of the patients, without knowing findings of each other during a period of June 2015 to July 2016. Weighted Kappa statistics was used to compare the data. It is a qualitative test.
Results: The weighted Kappa statistics was used for the intersystem association and reliability of the Shaw’s classification system compared with standard POP Q system were 0.784 for the overall stage:0.782 and 0.68 for anterior and posterior compartment respectively; 0.86.for central compartment.
Conclusion: There was strong intersystem association seen between the Shaws system and POP Q system of classification of pelvic organ prolapse.
Keywords: Standard POP Q System, Shaw’s system, Intersystem association