title: Outcome assessment with blinded versus unblinded POP-Q exams.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To determine whether blinded and unblinded Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q) examinations differ in a randomized trial.
  
  
  METHODS
  Blinded POP-Q examinations performed at 3 months and 1 year were compared with unblinded examinations performed by the surgeon in a randomized trial of vaginal mesh for pelvic organ prolapse.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Sixty-five patients were included in the study. Correlations between the blinded and unblinded POP-Q points and stages varied from low to moderate (rho = 0.29-0.78). At 3 months, the blinded overall prolapse recurrence rate was 45.3% compared with 39.1% based on unblinded staging (P = .34). At 1 year, the blinded overall recurrence rate was significantly higher than the unblinded recurrence rate: 68.3% vs 53.3% (P = .004). The 1-year blinded anterior wall recurrence rate was also higher than the recurrence based on unblinded staging: 56.7% vs 43.3% (P = .021).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Use of unblinded POP-Q staging resulted in underestimation of 1-year overall recurrence after prolapse repair.
authors: Section of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington Hospital Center, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA.
authors: Danielle D
authors: DD
authors: Antosh
authors: Cheryl B
authors: CB
authors: Iglesia
authors: Sonali
authors: S
authors: Vora
authors: Andrew I
authors: AI
authors: Sokol
mesh_terms: D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D056887:Pelvic Organ Prolapse / Q000601:surgery*; D010808:Physical Examination; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; D016037:Single-Blind Method; D013526:Surgical Mesh; D016896:Treatment Outcome