Table 1 Characteristics of studies reporting fistula prevalence included in the review
From: Estimating the prevalence of obstetric fistula: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Author | Study area | Study design | Assessment of fistula | Number of fistula | Number of women/pregnancies | Prevalence(per 1000 WRA) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Community based studies | ||||||
Muleta et al., 2008 [18] | Seven rural administrative regions in Ethiopia | Cross-sectional survey of obstetric fistula | Women reporting leakage of urine, faeces or both examined in the health facilities | 44 (untreated) | 19,153 | 1.62 (1.53, 2.64) |
Walraven et al., 2001 [24] | Random sample of 20 rural villages in Farafenni, The Gambia | Census of all women aged 15-54 for reproductive morbidity | External, vaginal speculum and bimanual pelvic examination by female gynaecologist | 1 | 1,038 | 0.95 (0.02, 5.26) |
Kulkarni, 2007 [35] | Six PHC areas (urban and rural) in Maharashtra, India | Cross sectional survey of non-pregnant, ever married women with proven fertility for reproductive morbidity | Clinical examination but unspecified what or by whom | 1 | 1,167 | 0.86 (0.02, 4.8) |
Bhatia et al., 1997 [19] | Villages (25% urban, 75% rural) with at least 500 people in Karnataka, India | Cross sectional study of all eligible women under 35 with a child under 5 for reproductive morbidity | External, vaginal speculum and bimanual pelvic examination by female gynaecologist | 1 | 385 | 2.6 (0.07, 14.39) |
Younis et al., 1993 [29] | Two rural villages in Giza, Egypt | Cross sectional study of reproductive morbidity in ever-married, non pregnant women. | Speculum and bimanual examination by female physicians [1] | 0 | 509 | 0.0 (0.0 , 7.90) |
Deeb et al., 2003 [27] | Nabi Sheet, Lebanon | Cross sectional study of reproductive morbidity in ever married, non-pregnant women | Thorough inspection of external genitalia, with speculum conducted by female physicians [1] | 0 | 506 | 0.0 (0.0, 7.3) |
Al-Riyami et al., 2007 [28] | Oman, Mixed | National Health Survey 2000 aiming to identify reproductive morbidity. Multi-stage stratified probability-sampling design of 1,968 households with ever married, non-pregnant women | Pelvic examination by a trained physician [1] | 0 | 1,662 | 0.0 (0.0, 2.2) |
Al-Qutob, 2001 [26] | Ain Al-Basha, Jordan. Semi-urban | Random sample of Jordanian women | Comprehensive physical and pelvic examination conducted by trained female physician, a nurse/midwife and a laboratory technician [1] | 0 | 379 | 0.0 (0.0, 9.7) |
Bulut et al., 1995 [25] | City of Istanbul, Turkey | Systematic sample of non-pregnant, ever married parous women who had ever used contraception | Physical examination by female physician [1] | 0 | 696 | 0.0 (0.0, 5.3) |
Tehrani et al., 2011 [34] | Four provinces of Iran | Multi-stage stratified probability-sampling design of non-pregnant non menopausal women 18-45 | Comprehensive gynaecological examination of all married women including a speculum examination [1] | 0 | 1117 | 0.0 (0.0. 3.3) |
Studies with hospital based recruitment | ||||||
Ijaiya and Aboyeji, 2004 [23] | Ilorin, Nigeria, urban | Hospital review of women with fistula repair | Repair | 34 | 32,188 | 1.1 (0.7, 1.5) |
Kalilani-Phiri et al., 2010 [21] | Nine districts (urban and rural) in Malawi | Hospital record reviews from gynaecological, prenatal, obstetric wards and operating theatres as well as fistula repair services. Only women originating from nine districts included | Repair | 111 | 425,865 | 0.26 (0.2, 0.3) |
Mabeya, 2004 [36] | West Pokot, Kenya. Rural | Hospital record review supplemented by surgeons’ notes. Cases of fistulae presenting to the two rural hospitals that are the main hospitals in the district | Repair | 66 | 150,000 | 0.44 (0.34, 0.55) |