Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2019 Dec;30(12):2001-2011.
doi: 10.1007/s00192-019-03992-z. Epub 2019 Jun 4.

Prevalence of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in community-dwelling women in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Prevalence of symptomatic pelvic floor disorders in community-dwelling women in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Rakibul M Islam et al. Int Urogynecol J. 2019 Dec.

Abstract

Introduction and hypothesis: Pelvic floor disorders (PFDs), including urinary incontinence (UI), faecal incontinence (FI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP), are common debilitating conditions globally, with considerable variation of prevalence reported in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). It was hypothesised that the variation could be due to both random and non-random errors. The aim was to determine the pooled prevalence estimates of PFDs among community-dwelling women in LMICs and to examine possible reasons for the variations of prevalence reported.

Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Maternity & Infant Care was conducted to retrieve eligible studies. A meta-analysis with a random effects model and a meta-regression were performed. The manuscript was structured using the PRISMA checklist .

Results: A total of 49 studies were included. The overall pooled prevalence of PFDs in LMICs was 25% (95% CI 22-29%). The pooled prevalence of UI, FI and POP was 30% (95% CI 25-35%), 8% (95% CI 4-11%) and 15% (95% CI 10-20%), respectively. A significant difference in the prevalence of UI was found between studies conducted in low and lower middle-income and upper middle-income countries and for FI between studies that used validated and non-validated questionnaires. Other methodological features did not show any effect on the variation of prevalence estimates of UI, FI and POP.

Conclusions: PFDs affect a substantial proportion of women in LMICs. Since methodological heterogeneity was unexplained, this review suggests the need for large nationally representative population-based surveys to provide reliable estimates of the prevalence of PFDs in LMICs.

Keywords: Faecal incontinence; Low and middle-income countries; Pelvic floor disorders; Pelvic organ prolapse; Urinary incontinence.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Urol Int. 2017;99(1):84-90 - PubMed
    1. Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Jan;123(1):141-8 - PubMed
    1. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Jul;193(1):103-13 - PubMed
    1. Int Urogynecol J. 2017 Mar;28(3):423-429 - PubMed
    1. Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct. 2001;12(3):178-86 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources