Kate M Brett1, Jenny A Higgins. 1. Division of Epidemiology, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Hyattsville, Md 20782, USA. kbrett@cdc.gov
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We investigated hysterectomy prevalence among Hispanic women. METHODS: We obtained data from 4684 Hispanic women and 20 604 non-Hispanic White women from the 1998-1999 National Health Interview Survey. We calculated nationally representative odds ratios of previous hysterectomy, controlling for confounders. RESULTS: Compared with non-Hispanic White women, the odds ratio for hysterectomy was 0.36 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.30, 0.44) for Hispanic women with no high school diploma, 0.57 (95% CI = 0.44, 0.74) for high school graduates, and 0.67 (95% CI = 0.42, 0.87) for college attenders. Country of origin had little influence on hysterectomy prevalence. Hysterectomy was positively associated with acculturation. CONCLUSIONS: Hispanic women undergo fewer hysterectomies than do non-Hispanic White women. The reasons for this, as well as information on ethnicity-specific appropriateness of hysterectomy, should be explored.
OBJECTIVES: We investigated hysterectomy prevalence among Hispanic women. METHODS: We obtained data from 4684 Hispanic women and 20 604 non-Hispanic White women from the 1998-1999 National Health Interview Survey. We calculated nationally representative odds ratios of previous hysterectomy, controlling for confounders. RESULTS: Compared with non-Hispanic White women, the odds ratio for hysterectomy was 0.36 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.30, 0.44) for Hispanic women with no high school diploma, 0.57 (95% CI = 0.44, 0.74) for high school graduates, and 0.67 (95% CI = 0.42, 0.87) for college attenders. Country of origin had little influence on hysterectomy prevalence. Hysterectomy was positively associated with acculturation. CONCLUSIONS: Hispanic women undergo fewer hysterectomies than do non-Hispanic White women. The reasons for this, as well as information on ethnicity-specific appropriateness of hysterectomy, should be explored.
Authors: Roumiana S Boneva; Elizabeth M Maloney; Jin-Mann Lin; James F Jones; Friedrich Wieser; Urs M Nater; Christine M Heim; William C Reeves Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2010-11-20 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Ebenezer O Babalola; Adil E Bharucha; Cathy D Schleck; John B Gebhart; Alan R Zinsmeister; L Joseph Melton Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Vanessa L Jacoby; Victor Y Fujimoto; Linda C Giudice; Miriam Kuppermann; A Eugene Washington Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2010-04-28 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Summer V Harvey; Ruth M Pfeiffer; Rebecca Landy; Nicolas Wentzensen; Megan A Clarke Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2022-06-25 Impact factor: 10.693
Authors: Christy G Woolcott; Gertraud Maskarinec; Malcolm C Pike; Brian E Henderson; Lynne R Wilkens; Laurence N Kolonel Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2008-11-14 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Danielle R Gartner; Paul L Delamater; Robert A Hummer; Jennifer L Lund; Brian W Pence; Whitney R Robinson Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2020-05 Impact factor: 4.860