. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Aug 1.

Published in final edited form as: Int Urogynecol J. 2016 Feb 27;27(8):1227–1234. doi: 10.1007/s00192-016-2980-1

Table 1.

Demographics of three groups of women with varying degrees of pelvic organ support

	Group 1 Normal support (n = 5)	Group 2 Normal apex/Vaginal prolapse (n = 5)	Group 3 Apical prolapse (n = 9)	P value
Age, years	46.2 ± 10.4	52.2 ± 14.3	57.7 ± 10.4	.23
Parity	1 (0–3)	3 (2–3)	3 (0–4)	.11
BMI kg/m²	29.9 ± 6.8	28.0 ± 4.6	28.0 ± 7.70	.87
POP-Q point C	−6 (−7 to −6)	−5 (−10 to −5)	−3 (−4 to 5)	.001
Point Ba	−2 (−3 to −1)	1 (0 to 3)	1 (−1 to 5)	.006
Point Bp	−3 (−3 to −1)	0 (−2 to 0)	−1 (−3 to 0)	.11

Data reported as mean ± standard deviation (SD) or median (total range). P values determined using analysis of variance (ANOVA) for comparisons of means and Kruskal Wallis test for parity and Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification system. All locations measured in centimeters relative to hymenal ring at rest, which is defined as 0 BMI body mass index