Treatment recommendations for the management of persistent pelvic pain: a systematic review of international clinical practice guidelines

Amelia K Mardon; Hayley B Leake; Kimberley Szeto; Thomas Astill; Sandra Hilton; Graham Lorimer Moseley; Katherine Jane Chalmers

doi:10.1111/1471-0528.17064

Treatment recommendations for the management of persistent pelvic pain: a systematic review of international clinical practice guidelines

BJOG. 2022 Jul;129(8):1248-1260. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.17064. Epub 2022 Jan 10.

Authors

Amelia K Mardon¹, Hayley B Leake^{1

2}, Kimberley Szeto^{1

3}, Thomas Astill⁴, Sandra Hilton⁵, Graham Lorimer Moseley¹, Katherine Jane Chalmers^{1

6}

Affiliations

¹ IIMPACT in Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
² Centre for IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
³ Alliance for Research in Exercise, Nutrition and Activity, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
⁴ Brain Stimulation and Rehabilitation (BrainSTAR) Lab, Western Sydney University, Campbelltown, New South Wales, Australia.
⁵ Entropy Physiotherapy, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
⁶ Western Sydney University, Campbelltown, New South Wales, Australia.

PMID: 34919325
DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.17064

Abstract

Background: Females with persistent pelvic pain (PPP) report great variability in the treatments recommended to them despite the availability of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) that aim to standardise care. A clear consensus for the best practice care for PPP is required.

Objective: To identify and summarise treatment recommendations across CPGs for the management of PPP, and appraise their quality.

Search strategy: MEDLINE, CENTRAL, EMBASE, EmCare, SCOPUS, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Web of Science Core Collection and relevant guideline databases were searched from their inception to June 2021.

Selection criteria: Included CPGs were those for the management of urogynaecological conditions in adult females published in English, of any publication date, and endorsed by a professional organisation or society.

Data collection and analysis: We screened 1379 records and included 20 CPGs. CPG quality was assessed using The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE-II) tool. Descriptive synthesis compiled treatment recommendations across CPGs.

Main results: The CPGs for seven conditions provided 270 individual recommendations. On quality appraisal, guidelines on average scored 'excellent' for the domains 'scope and purpose' (80.6%, SD = 13.3) and 'clarity and presentation' (74.4%, SD = 12.0); for other domains, average scores were satisfactory or poor. Four guidelines (for Endometriosis: NICE, RANZCOG and ESHRE; for polycystic ovary syndrome: Teede et al. 2018, International Evidence Based Guideline for the Assessment and Management of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia) were deemed recommended for use. Recommendations were most frequent for pharmaceutical and surgical interventions. Recommendations were variable for psychological, physiotherapy and other conservative interventions.

Conclusions: The quality of CPGs for PPP is generally poor. Several CPGs endorse the consideration of biopsychosocial elements of PPP. Yet most recommend pharmaceutical, surgical and other biomedical interventions.

Keywords: clinical practice guidelines; endometriosis; pelvic pain; systematic review.

Publication types

Systematic Review

MeSH terms

Adult
Consensus
Female
Humans
Pelvic Pain / diagnosis
Pelvic Pain / etiology
Pelvic Pain / therapy
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Polycystic Ovary Syndrome* / therapy
Practice Guidelines as Topic*

Substances

Pharmaceutical Preparations

Abstract

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances

Grants and funding