Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of surgical options for the management of anterior and/or posterior vaginal wall prolapse: two randomised controlled trials within a comprehensive cohort study results from the PROSPECT Study
- Submitting institution
-
Glasgow Caledonian University
- Unit of assessment
- 3 - Allied Health Professions, Dentistry, Nursing and Pharmacy
- Output identifier
- 41119750
- Type
- D - Journal article
- DOI
-
10.3310/hta20950
- Title of journal
- Health Technology Assessment
- Article number
- -
- First page
- 1
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 95
- ISSN
- 1366-5278
- Open access status
- Out of scope for open access requirements
- Month of publication
- January
- Year of publication
- 2017
- URL
-
-
- Supplementary information
-
-
- Request cross-referral to
- -
- Output has been delayed by COVID-19
- No
- COVID-19 affected output statement
- -
- Forensic science
- No
- Criminology
- No
- Interdisciplinary
- Yes
- Number of additional authors
-
14
- Research group(s)
-
-
- Citation count
- 16
- Proposed double-weighted
- Yes
- Double-weighted statement
- The use of mesh in prolapse surgery is controversial, with concerns regarding its safety and efficacy. This NIHR HTA report details a large, multi-component study involving two randomised controlled trials within a comprehensive cohort (CC) study (n=2,474) conducted in thirty-five UK hospitals, resulting in a 260-page output. The objectives were to compare synthetic non-absorbable mesh inlay, biological graft and mesh kit with a standard repair in terms of clinical effectiveness, adverse effects, quality of life (QoL), costs and cost-effectiveness. Andrew Elders conducted the statistical analyses, contributed to drafting many chapters of the monograph and reviewed the final report.
- Reserve for an output with double weighting
- No
- Additional information
- -
- Author contribution statement
- -
- Non-English
- No
- English abstract
- -