BackgroundObstetrical fistula is an abnormal opening between the reproductive tract and lower urinary and/or gastrointestinal tract resulting from obstetrical complications, affecting nearly two million women worldwide. It imposes physical, economic, social, and mental consequences on the affected women. Treatment outcomes vary and, mostly, surgical treatment results in improved quality of life and successful subsequent pregnancy for survivors.ObjectivesThe review aimed to chart and examine the treatment outcomes of obstetrical fistula surgical repair in low‐ and middle‐income countries.Search StrategyThis is a scoping review study to identify treatment outcomes of obstetrical fistula surgical repair in low‐ and middle‐income countries. The search was conducted from databases (PUBMED, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science), and gray literature (Google Scholar, Google, and conference proceedings).Selection CriteriaThe eligibility criteria were constructed using a participant, concept, and context framework and included study types of primary research, reviews, and reports. Studies without full text and in languages other than English were excluded.Data Collection and AnalysisThe relevant characteristics of the included studies were extracted on an Excel spreadsheet and analyzed to chart treatment outcomes.Main FindingsThe review examined the full text of 57 studies on the treatment outcomes of obstetrical fistula. The findings were grouped into two themes: early and late outcomes. The early outcomes included incontinence, surgical‐site infection, urine retention, hemorrhage, and retained catheter. The late outcomes included fistula recurrence, residual incontinence, quality of life, reproductive issues, mental health, family and social support, and financial status.ConclusionThe treatment outcomes of obstetrical fistula can be grouped into short‐term and long‐term outcomes. Although this review found adequate studies for the analysis, most study designs were poor. Stronger studies are recommended in the future to guide policy and decision‐making. We would like to suggest that researchers conduct systematic reviews and meta‐analyses independently for short‐term and long‐term outcomes.
