Published in:
01-07-2015 | Original Article
The S.A.C.S. (Satisfaction–Anatomy–Continence–Safety) score for evaluating pelvic organ prolapse surgery: a proposal for an outcome-based scoring system
Published in: International Urogynecology Journal | Issue 7/2015
Login to get accessAbstract
Introduction and hypothesis
To date, there is no overall consensus on the definition of cure after surgery for pelvic organ prolapse (POP). The aim of the study was to design and test the scoring system S.A.C.S. (Satisfaction–Anatomy–Continence–Safety) to assess and compare the outcomes of POP repair.
Methods
A total of 233 women underwent open sacrocolpopexy. The S.A.C.S. outcome scoring system was scheduled at 24 months of follow-up, and each component was detected according to: Satisfaction by mean of Patient Global Improvement Inventory scale, Anatomy by mean of POP Quantification system and bulge symptom, Continence by mean of pad use, and Safety by mean of the Clavien–Dindo classification of surgical complications. Each component produced a binary nominal categorical variable (1 or 0), with a total score of 4 representing cure. As a comparative tool, patients answered a simple yes/no question: “If you had to undergo surgery all over again, would you still do it?”. The degree of concordance was estimated using Cohen’s Kappa test.
Results
According to the S.A.C.S. scoring system, only 160 patients (68.6 %) reached the maximum score of cure. Sensitivity of the S.A.C.S. score was 74.1 %, specificity was 90 %, total diagnostic capacity was 75.5 %. The S.A.C.S. score internal consistency was good; the k-coefficient was higher for the satisfaction component of the score (k = 0.560).
Conclusion
This study proposes an original, simple post-operative scoring system integrating satisfaction, anatomy, continence, and safety reports for patients undergoing surgery for POP, providing a complete, although perfectible, method to accurately report outcomes in all clinical scenarios.