4.2 Article

An International Urogynecological Association (IUGA)/International Continence Society (ICS) joint report on the terminology for the conservative and nonpharmacological management of female pelvic floor dysfunction

期刊

INTERNATIONAL UROGYNECOLOGY JOURNAL
卷 28, 期 2, 页码 191-213

出版社

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s00192-016-3123-4

关键词

Consensus; Conservative management; Pelvic floor dysfunction; Terminology; Female

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There has been an increasing need for the terminology on the conservative management of female pelvic floor dysfunction to be collated in a clinically based consensus report. This Report combines the input of members and elected nominees of the Standardization and Terminology Committees of two International Organizations, the International Urogynecological Association (IUGA) and the International Continence Society (ICS), assisted at intervals by many external referees. An extensive process of nine rounds of internal and external review was developed to exhaustively examine each definition, with decision-making by collective opinion (consensus). Before opening up for comments on the webpages of ICS and IUGA, five experts from physiotherapy, neurology, urology, urogynecology, and nursing were invited to comment on the paper. A Terminology Report on the conservative management of female pelvic floor dysfunction, encompassing over 200 separate definitions, has been developed. It is clinically based, with the most common symptoms, signs, assessments, diagnoses, and treatments defined. Clarity and ease of use have been key aims to make it interpretable by practitioners and trainees in all the different specialty groups involved in female pelvic floor dysfunction. Ongoing review is not only anticipated, but will be required to keep the document updated and as widely acceptable as possible. A consensus-based terminology report for the conservative management of female pelvic floor dysfunction has been produced, aimed at being a significant aid to clinical practice and a stimulus for research.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据