• Jeanne Raisler CNM, DRPH, FACNM,

  • Santosh Kumari MSc,

    Search for more papers by this author
    • Santosh Kumari is a nurse specializing in Community Health Nursing. Currently, she is involved in teaching and training of nurses in community health nursing.

  • Indarjit Walia PhD,

    Search for more papers by this author
    • Indarjit Walia is the Principal of the College of Nursing in PGIMER, Chandigarh. Her area of specialization is community health.

  • Amarjeet Singh MD

    Corresponding authorSearch for more papers by this author
    • Amarjeet Singh is a physician specializing in social and preventive medicine. His area of interest is reproductive health.

Amarjeet Singh, MD, Additional Professor, Community Medicine, P.G.I.M.E.R., Chandigarh, India 160012.


The aims of this study are to estimate the prevalence of self-reported uterine prolapse and to determine the treatment-seeking behavior of the respondents. Participants of this study are married women of Dadu Majra colony, Chandigarh, India, January–February, 1996. A house-to-house screening of the women was done by a nursing student utilizing a checklist of indicator symptoms of uterine prolapse. All women reporting such symptoms were interviewed further. Among the 2,990 women surveyed, 227 (7.6%) reported symptoms of uterine prolapse. Of the 227 women with self-reported uterine prolapse, 128 (57%) had not taken any treatment, 28 went to a traditional birth attendant (TBA), and 47 (21%) consulted a doctor. Thirty-eight women were advised to have an operation, but only eight complied. Other treatments used by small numbers of women included the use of a ring pessary or alcohol-soaked swab and heel pressure technique. Reasons for non-consultation included shyness (80; 63%), lack of cooperation by the husband, lack of time (80; 63%) and lack of money (74; 58%). The prevalence of prolapse was significantly higher in women with higher parity. More than 7% of the women reported symptoms of uterine prolapse.