Baseline measures for women with mesh complications accessing a pain service (as part of the London Complex Mesh Centre)

IF 1.3 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY British Journal of Pain Pub Date : 2023-10-03 DOI:10.1177/20494637231206014
Anish Thillainathan, Julia Cambitizi, Victoria Tidman, Katrine Petersen, Moein Tavakkoli, Andrew Paul Baranowski
{"title":"Baseline measures for women with mesh complications accessing a pain service (as part of the London Complex Mesh Centre)","authors":"Anish Thillainathan, Julia Cambitizi, Victoria Tidman, Katrine Petersen, Moein Tavakkoli, Andrew Paul Baranowski","doi":"10.1177/20494637231206014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Pelvic mesh was first used for stress urinary incontinence in 1998 following which its usage rapidly expanded to include treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Numerous complications relating to mesh insertion soon became apparent, culminating in the Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety: First Do No Harm Report published by Baroness Cumberlege in 2020. Following this report, the UCLH London Complex Mesh Centre funded by NHS England, was one of a small number of specialist centres set up for mesh-injured women. The Pelvic Pain service of the Pain Management Centre at UCLH provides a service for patients attending the London Complex Mesh Centre. The aim of our study was to distinguish the differing needs of mesh-injured women from those with chronic pelvic pain by comparing patient-reported outcome measures between these two cohorts. Methods Distribution of data was calculated using the D’Agostino–Pearson normality test. Mann–Whitney tests were used to ascertain statistical difference between the two cohorts. Ethnicity was compared between groups using Fisher’s exact test. Quantile regression models were used to assess whether differences in medians between groups remained after adjustment for age and ethnicity. Statistical significance was set at p < .05. Results Patients with mesh were significantly older than those with chronic pelvic pain and were more likely to be of white ethnicity. After adjustment for age and ethnicity, analysis revealed that bladder interference, sex interference and DAPOS A were significantly higher amongst mesh-injured women, whereas GP and hospital admissions were significantly lower. Discussion Our data shows the importance of mesh-injured women having access to pain management services with pathways of care integrated within women’s and mental health services. It is essential that these programmes include support to discuss ways of returning to sexual relationships and have models to address anxiety such as graded exposure and psychological input.","PeriodicalId":46585,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Pain","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20494637231206014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction Pelvic mesh was first used for stress urinary incontinence in 1998 following which its usage rapidly expanded to include treatment of pelvic organ prolapse. Numerous complications relating to mesh insertion soon became apparent, culminating in the Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety: First Do No Harm Report published by Baroness Cumberlege in 2020. Following this report, the UCLH London Complex Mesh Centre funded by NHS England, was one of a small number of specialist centres set up for mesh-injured women. The Pelvic Pain service of the Pain Management Centre at UCLH provides a service for patients attending the London Complex Mesh Centre. The aim of our study was to distinguish the differing needs of mesh-injured women from those with chronic pelvic pain by comparing patient-reported outcome measures between these two cohorts. Methods Distribution of data was calculated using the D’Agostino–Pearson normality test. Mann–Whitney tests were used to ascertain statistical difference between the two cohorts. Ethnicity was compared between groups using Fisher’s exact test. Quantile regression models were used to assess whether differences in medians between groups remained after adjustment for age and ethnicity. Statistical significance was set at p < .05. Results Patients with mesh were significantly older than those with chronic pelvic pain and were more likely to be of white ethnicity. After adjustment for age and ethnicity, analysis revealed that bladder interference, sex interference and DAPOS A were significantly higher amongst mesh-injured women, whereas GP and hospital admissions were significantly lower. Discussion Our data shows the importance of mesh-injured women having access to pain management services with pathways of care integrated within women’s and mental health services. It is essential that these programmes include support to discuss ways of returning to sexual relationships and have models to address anxiety such as graded exposure and psychological input.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
有补片并发症的妇女获得疼痛服务的基线措施(作为伦敦复杂补片中心的一部分)
盆腔网首次用于压力性尿失禁在1998年,随后其使用迅速扩大到包括盆腔器官脱垂的治疗。与补片插入有关的许多并发症很快就变得明显起来,最终在2020年由Baroness Cumberlege发表的《独立药品和医疗器械安全:第一份无害报告》中达到顶峰。在这份报告之后,由英国国民健康保险制度资助的UCLH伦敦复杂网状中心是为数不多的为网状受伤妇女设立的专业中心之一。UCLH疼痛管理中心的骨盆疼痛服务为参加伦敦复杂网状中心的患者提供服务。我们研究的目的是通过比较两组患者报告的结果来区分网伤妇女和慢性盆腔疼痛妇女的不同需求。方法采用D’agostino - pearson正态检验计算数据分布。使用Mann-Whitney检验来确定两个队列之间的统计学差异。使用Fisher精确检验比较各组之间的种族。分位数回归模型用于评估各组间中位数在调整年龄和种族后是否仍然存在差异。p <. 05。结果使用补片的患者年龄明显大于慢性盆腔疼痛患者,且多为白种人。在对年龄和种族进行调整后,分析显示,在网伤妇女中,膀胱干扰、性干扰和DAPOS A明显较高,而全科医生和住院率明显较低。我们的数据表明,受网伤妇女获得疼痛管理服务的重要性,并将护理途径纳入妇女和精神卫生服务。至关重要的是,这些规划包括支持讨论回归性关系的方式,并有解决焦虑的模式,如分级暴露和心理输入。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
British Journal of Pain
British Journal of Pain CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
11.10%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: British Journal of Pain is a peer-reviewed quarterly British journal with an international multidisciplinary Editorial Board. The journal publishes original research and reviews on all major aspects of pain and pain management. Reviews reflect the body of evidence of the topic and are suitable for a multidisciplinary readership. Where empirical evidence is lacking, the reviews reflect the generally held opinions of experts in the field. The Journal has broadened its scope and has become a forum for publishing primary research together with brief reports related to pain and pain interventions. Submissions from all over the world have been published and are welcome. Official journal of the British Pain Society.
期刊最新文献
Community opioid dispensing after rib fracture injuries: CODI study. Persistent postsurgical pain in hip fracture patients. A prospective longitudinal study with multifaceted assessment. Costs of physician and diagnostic imaging services for shoulder, knee, and low back pain conditions: A population-based study in Alberta, Canada. The value of social relationships in the biopsychosocial model of pain. Assessing the feasibility of the GOTT (Gabapentinoid and Opioid Tapering Toolkit) in a primary care setting in North-East England.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1