Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP) occurs when one or more pelvic organs descend into or through the vaginal opening, significantly impacting physical and mental health. POP affects the female reproductive tract and, overwhelmingly, people who identify as women. However, little research has examined the impact of gendered expectations on women’s treatment-seeking for POP and their decision-making around surgery for POP. To address this gap, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 26 women seeking surgery for POP in Alberta, Canada. Data were analyzed from a gender-based lens, using the Framework Method. Participants reported the need to balance their identities as women, partners, and mothers in their pursuit of treatment and faced many barriers to treatment related to their gendered responsibilities. Findings highlight the gendered experiences of prolapse in the context of healthcare needs and can inform policies and practices which promote more equitable access to prolapse treatment.

Background: Given the prevalence of women seeking surgical treatment for pelvic organ prolapse (POP), there is a need to understand women’s decision-making regarding uterine-preserving versus hysterectomy-based surgeries. Historically, hysterectomy-based surgeries have been the preferred treatment for pelvic organ prolapse; however, contemporary evidence supports uterine-preserving surgeries as equivalent. At present, the lack of information available to the general public and limited options presented at surgical consultation for pelvic organ prolapse may hinder women’s autonomy as they navigate surgical treatment. Objectives: To examine the factors affecting women’s decision-making processes regarding uterine-preserving or hysterectomy-based surgery for pelvic organ prolapse. Design: This is a qualitative study. Methods: We conducted semi-structured, qualitative interviews with women seeking surgery for pelvic organ prolapse to explore the factors affecting women’s decision-making between hysterectomy-based and uterine-preserving surgeries. Results: Women (n = 26) used clinical and personal factors to determine which surgery was best. Women noted that the lack of evidence (clinical and/or anecdotal) available to them hindered their decision-making, causing them to rely more on their own interpretations of the evidence, what they perceived to be “normal,” and what their surgeon recommended. Even with standardized discussion regarding the existing clinical equipoise between surgeries at the clinical consultation, some women still had misperceptions that hysterectomy-based surgery would convey the lowest risk of prolapse recurrence and be best for severe prolapse. Conclusion: There is a need for more transparency in discussions about prolapse and the factors affecting women’s decision-making for surgical repair of pelvic organ prolapse. Clinicians should be prepared to offer the option of hysterectomy-based or uterine-preserving surgeries and to clearly explain the clinical equipoise between these procedures.

In addition to altering public infrastructure and social patterning, the COVID‐19 pandemic has delayed many pelvic organ prolapse (POP) surgeries. POP‐related stigma, symptomology and the experience of waiting for POP surgery can negatively impact women's quality of life and mental health. The experience of preoperative POP patients during the pandemic thus entails a new intersection of gendered, stigmatic and medical realities. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 26 preoperative POP patients as part of a larger qualitative study, 20 of whom spontaneously volunteered information about how the pandemic coloured their experience living with and awaiting surgery for POP. Interviews occurred between January and July 2021, which coincided with the second and third waves of the pandemic in Alberta, Canada, and before full immunisation was available for all Albertans. Pandemic‐related interview excerpts were thematically analysed, and four main findings emerged. (1) Though surgical delay meant living with unpleasant symptoms for longer than anticipated, some sought this out in order to protect vulnerable loved ones from possible hospital‐acquired infection, (2) shifting and unclear hospital policies and logistics resulted in intense preoperative stress, at times causing women to temporarily cease treatment, (3) decreased access to public restroom infrastructure caused women to reduce their outings and (4) the imperative to minimise social gatherings made it easier for women to engage in POP‐related, shame‐based self‐isolation without the notice of friends and family. As they can influence postoperative outcomes and treatment adherence, trends observed should be of interest to clinicians and policymakers alike.