Vaginal Support Pessaries: Indications for Use and Fitting ... - SUNA

SERIES
Figure 5.
Gellhorn Short and Long-Stem Pessaries
Figure 6.
Cube Pessaries
Figure 7.
Incontinence Pessaries
Note: Examples include, top row:
Incontinence Dish (with and without
support); middle row: Marland (with
and without support); bottom row left:
Ring with support membrane and
incontinence knob; bottom right:
Incontinence Ring.
presence of drainage holes should
allow continuous drainage of normal
vaginal epithelial shedding
and discharge. Retained discharge
may act as a medium for bacterial
overgrowth, increasing infection
risk, and/or odor. For this reason,
pessary styles with optional
drainage holes (such as Cube pessaries)
are typically preferred
whenever possible.
Providers often prefer to use a
limited selection of available pessaries.
For example, in a survey of
urogynecologists, the majority
reported using Ring pessaries for
anterior and apical defects, spacefilling
pessaries (such as a Donut)
for women who have introital
integrity and posterior defects, and
self-retaining pessaries (such as the
Gellhorn) for severe prolapse
(Cundiff, Weidner, Visco, Bump, &
Addison, 2000). General gynecologists
reportedly also used Ring pessaries
most frequently, deeming
them easiest to use, with Gellhorn
pessaries used most commonly for
advanced prolapse (Pott-Grinstein
& Newcomer, 2001). The latter
respondents rated Donut pessaries
the least easy to wear and Gellhorn
pessaries most difficult to remove.
Generally, providers’ choice of
styles of pessary to stock and fit
appears to be based on the individual’s
training, experience, and
product availability.
Pessary size selection is also
currently guided by experience
because no specific vaginal measures
have predicted successful fit.
In one study, Pelvic Organ
Prolapse Quantification (POP-Q),
parameters were tested as a potential
objective predictor but were
not found to predict pessary size;
however, women with a shorter
total vaginal length were less likely
to be successfully fitted (Nager
et al., 2009). Thus, pessary fitting
remains an art, with some reliance
on trial and error.
Pessary Fitting
Because there has been little
success in identifying objective
evidence to improve pessary
choice, new providers must rely
on expert opinion and mentorship.
Pessary manufacturers provide
recommendations to help the
novice match pessary styles with
patient findings (Bioteque of
America, 2011). Successful fitting
also depends on clinician experience
and training. Few nursing or
medical programs spend time
teaching pessary use (Pott-
Grinstein & Newcomer, 2001).
However, with a sound general
background of women’s health
care, even in the absence of optimal
mentorship, clinicians can
educate themselves to become
competent and safe providers of
this low-risk intervention.
The goal of fitting is to find a
pessary that improves the target
pelvic floor symptoms, is comfortable
for the patient, is retained
during activity and toileting, and
does not obstruct voiding or defecation,
or cause vaginal irritation.
Suggestions for improving fitting
outcomes are listed in Table 3.
SPECIAL SERIES ON PESSARIES
UROLOGIC NURSING / May-June 2012 / Volume 32 Number 3 119