S'abonner

Patient, surgeon, and hospital disparities associated with benign hysterectomy approach and perioperative complications - 27/09/17

Doi : 10.1016/j.ajog.2016.12.020 
Ambar Mehta, BS a, Tim Xu, MPP a, Susan Hutfless, PhD b, Martin A. Makary, MD, MPH c, Abdulrahman K. Sinno, MD d, Edward J. Tanner, MD d, Rebecca L. Stone, MD d, Karen Wang, MD e, Amanda N. Fader, MD d,
a Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 
b Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, MD 
c Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, MD 
d Kelly Gynecologic Oncology Service, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, MD 
e Division of Gynecologic Specialties, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, MD 

Corresponding author: Amanda N. Fader, MD.

Abstract

Background

Hysterectomy is among the most common major surgical procedures performed in women. Approximately 450,000 hysterectomy procedures are performed each year in the United States for benign indications. However, little is known regarding contemporary US hysterectomy trends for women with benign disease with respect to operative technique and perioperative complications, and the association between these 2 factors with patient, surgeon, and hospital characteristics.

Objective

We sought to describe contemporary hysterectomy trends and explore associations between patient, surgeon, and hospital characteristics with surgical approach and perioperative complications.

Study Design

Hysterectomies performed for benign indications by general gynecologists from July 2012 through September 2014 were analyzed in the all-payer Maryland Health Services Cost Review Commission database. We excluded hysterectomies performed by gynecologic oncologists, reproductive endocrinologists, and female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgeons. We included both open hysterectomies and those performed by minimally invasive surgery, which included vaginal hysterectomies. Perioperative complications were defined using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality patient safety indicators. Surgeon hysterectomy volume during the 2-year study period was analyzed (0-5 cases annually = very low, 6-10 = low, 11-20 = medium, and ≥21 = high). We utilized logistic regression and negative binomial regression to identify patient, surgeon, and hospital characteristics associated with minimally invasive surgery utilization and perioperative complications, respectively.

Results

A total of 5660 hospitalizations were identified during the study period. Most patients (61.5%) had an open hysterectomy; 38.5% underwent a minimally invasive surgery procedure (25.1% robotic, 46.6% laparoscopic, 28.3% vaginal). Most surgeons (68.2%) were very low– or low-volume surgeons. Factors associated with a lower likelihood of undergoing minimally invasive surgery included older patient age (reference 45-64 years; 20-44 years: adjusted odds ratio, 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.051.28), black race (reference white; adjusted odds ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.630.78), Hispanic ethnicity (adjusted odds ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.480.80), smaller hospital (reference large; small: adjusted odds ratio, 0.26; 95% confidence interval, 0.150.45; medium: adjusted odds ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.790.96), medium hospital hysterectomy volume (reference ≥200 hysterectomies; 100-200: adjusted odds ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.710.87), and medium vs high surgeon volume (reference high; medium: adjusted odds ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.780.97). Complications occurred in 25.8% of open and 8.2% of minimally invasive hysterectomies (P < .0001). Minimally invasive hysterectomy (adjusted odds ratio, 0.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.170.27) and large hysterectomy volume hospitals (reference ≥200 hysterectomies; 1-100: adjusted odds ratio, 2.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.603.20; 101-200: adjusted odds ratio, 1.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.232.16) were associated with fewer complications, while patient payer, including Medicare (reference private; adjusted odds ratio, 1.86; 95% confidence interval, 1.332.61), Medicaid (adjusted odds ratio, 1.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.302.04), and self-pay status (adjusted odds ratio, 2.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.404.12), and very-low and low surgeon hysterectomy volume (reference ≥21 cases; 1-5 cases: adjusted odds ratio, 1.73; 95% confidence interval, 1.222.47; 6-10 cases: adjusted odds ratio, 1.60; 95% confidence interval, 1.112.23) were associated with perioperative complications.

Conclusion

Use of minimally invasive hysterectomy for benign indications remains variable, with most patients undergoing open, more morbid procedures. Older and black patients and smaller hospitals are associated with open hysterectomy. Patient race and payer status, hysterectomy approach, and surgeon volume were associated with perioperative complications. Hysterectomies performed for benign indications by high-volume surgeons or by minimally invasive techniques may represent an opportunity to reduce preventable harm.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Key words : benign indication, complications, hysterectomy, minimally-invasive, surgeon volume


Plan


 The authors report no conflict of interest.
 Cite this article as: Mehta A, Xu T, Hutfless S, et al. Patient, surgeon, and hospital disparities associated with benign hysterectomy approach and perioperative complications. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2017;216:497.e1-10.


© 2017  Elsevier Inc. Tous droits réservés.
Ajouter à ma bibliothèque Retirer de ma bibliothèque Imprimer
Export

    Export citations

  • Fichier

  • Contenu

Vol 216 - N° 5

P. 497.e1-497.e10 - mai 2017 Retour au numéro
Article précédent Article précédent
  • Is vaginal mesh a stimulus of autoimmune disease?
  • Bilal Chughtai, Art Sedrakyan, Jialin Mao, Karyn S. Eilber, Jennifer T. Anger, J. Quentin Clemens
| Article suivant Article suivant
  • Periprocedural outcomes comparing fibroid embolization and focused ultrasound: a randomized controlled trial and comprehensive cohort analysis
  • Emily P. Barnard, Ahmed M. AbdElmagied, Lisa E. Vaughan, Amy L. Weaver, Shannon K. Laughlin-Tommaso, Gina K. Hesley, David A. Woodrum, Vanessa L. Jacoby, Maureen P. Kohi, Thomas M. Price, Angel Nieves, Michael J. Miller, Bijan J. Borah, Krzysztof R. Gorny, Phyllis C. Leppert, Lisa G. Peterson, Elizabeth A. Stewart

Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.

Déjà abonné à cette revue ?

Mon compte


Plateformes Elsevier Masson

Déclaration CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM est déclaré à la CNIL, déclaration n° 1286925.

En application de la loi nº78-17 du 6 janvier 1978 relative à l'informatique, aux fichiers et aux libertés, vous disposez des droits d'opposition (art.26 de la loi), d'accès (art.34 à 38 de la loi), et de rectification (art.36 de la loi) des données vous concernant. Ainsi, vous pouvez exiger que soient rectifiées, complétées, clarifiées, mises à jour ou effacées les informations vous concernant qui sont inexactes, incomplètes, équivoques, périmées ou dont la collecte ou l'utilisation ou la conservation est interdite.
Les informations personnelles concernant les visiteurs de notre site, y compris leur identité, sont confidentielles.
Le responsable du site s'engage sur l'honneur à respecter les conditions légales de confidentialité applicables en France et à ne pas divulguer ces informations à des tiers.


Tout le contenu de ce site: Copyright © 2024 Elsevier, ses concédants de licence et ses contributeurs. Tout les droits sont réservés, y compris ceux relatifs à l'exploration de textes et de données, a la formation en IA et aux technologies similaires. Pour tout contenu en libre accès, les conditions de licence Creative Commons s'appliquent.