Literature DB >> 23640007

Improving the accuracy of prolapse and incontinence procedure epidemiology by utilizing both inpatient and outpatient data.

Christopher S Elliott1, Kim F Rhoads, Craig V Comiter, Bertha Chen, Eric R Sokol.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The epidemiologic description of pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI) procedures is documented in several large studies using national database cohorts. These studies, however, may underestimate the number of procedures performed because they only capture procedures performed in either the inpatient or outpatient settings alone. We present a complete annual description of all inpatient and outpatient surgeries for POP and SUI in California.
METHODS: We reviewed a record of all inpatient and outpatient POP and SUI surgeries performed in California in 2008 using data from the Office of Statewide Health Planning (OSHPD).
RESULTS: In 2008, 20,004 and 20,330 women in California underwent POP and SUI procedures, respectively. Of these, 3,134 (15.6%) and 9,016 (44.3%) were performed in an outpatient setting. The age-adjusted rates of POP and SUI were 1.20 and 1.20 per 1,000 US females, respectively. This correlates to 186,000 POP and 186,000 SUI procedures per year nationally. Vaginal apical suspensions were more common in those undergoing surgery as an inpatient (45.1 vs 19.4%). The use of mesh to augment prolapse repairs was similar (22.3% inpatient vs 19.3% outpatient). SUI procedures performed in the outpatient setting were more likely to be performed as stand-alone procedures (82.9 vs 18.8%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: In California, 16% of POP and 44% of SUI procedures were performed in an outpatient surgical setting in 2008. Epidemiologic studies of POP and SUI should account for the fact that a substantial number of repairs are performed in the outpatient setting in order to achieve accuracy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23640007     DOI: 10.1007/s00192-013-2113-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urogynecol J        ISSN: 0937-3462            Impact factor:   2.894


  20 in total

1.  Variation in the quality of surgical care for uterovaginal prolapse.

Authors:  Kim F Rhoads; Eric R Sokol
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  Rectocele repair: a randomized trial of three surgical techniques including graft augmentation.

Authors:  Marie Fidela R Paraiso; Matthew D Barber; Tristi W Muir; Mark D Walters
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 8.661

3.  ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 85: Pelvic organ prolapse.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 7.661

4.  Predicting the number of women who will undergo incontinence and prolapse surgery, 2010 to 2050.

Authors:  Jennifer M Wu; Amie Kawasaki; Andrew F Hundley; Alexis A Dieter; Evan R Myers; Vivian W Sung
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-04-02       Impact factor: 8.661

5.  The relationship between anterior and apical compartment support.

Authors:  Aimee Summers; Lisa A Winkel; Hero K Hussain; John O L DeLancey
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2006-03-30       Impact factor: 8.661

6.  Advanced anterior vaginal wall prolapse is highly correlated with apical prolapse.

Authors:  Kristin Rooney; Kimberly Kenton; Elizabeth R Mueller; Mary Pat FitzGerald; Linda Brubaker
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 8.661

7.  Pelvic organ prolapse surgery in the United States, 1997.

Authors:  Jeanette S Brown; L Elaine Waetjen; Leslee L Subak; David H Thom; Stephen Van den Eeden; Eric Vittinghoff
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 8.661

8.  Procedures for urinary incontinence in the United States, 1979-1997.

Authors:  Sarah Hamilton Boyles; Anne M Weber; Leslie Meyn
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 8.661

9.  The age distribution, rates, and types of surgery for pelvic organ prolapse in the USA.

Authors:  Aparna D Shah; Neeraj Kohli; Sujatha S Rajan; Lennox Hoyte
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J Pelvic Floor Dysfunct       Date:  2007-09-20

10.  Trends in stress urinary incontinence inpatient procedures in the United States, 1979-2004.

Authors:  Sallie S Oliphant; Li Wang; Clareann H Bunker; Jerry L Lowder
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 8.661

View more
  4 in total

1.  Self-reported pelvic organ prolapse surgery, prevalence, and nonobstetric risk factors: findings from the Nord Trøndelag Health Study.

Authors:  Risa Anna Margaretha Lonnée-Hoffmann; Øyvind Salvesen; Siv Mørkved; Berit Schei
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2014-10-28       Impact factor: 2.894

2.  Knowledge of women during the third trimester of pregnancy regarding pelvic floor disorders.

Authors:  Neriya Zion Yohay; Ari Weiss; Adi Y Weintraub; Kochav Daya; Maayan Elnir Katz; Debi Elharar; Zehava Yohay; Raya Tashlizky Madar; Tamar Eshkoli
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2022-05-02       Impact factor: 2.894

Review 3.  International urogynecology consultation chapter 1 committee 2: Epidemiology of pelvic organ prolapse: prevalence, incidence, natural history, and service needs.

Authors:  Heidi W Brown; Aparna Hegde; Markus Huebner; Hedwig Neels; Hayley C Barnes; Gisele Vissoci Marquini; Narmin Mukhtarova; Bernard Mbwele; Visha Tailor; Ervin Kocjancic; Elisa Trowbridge; Lynsey Hayward
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2022-01-03       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  Trends and Factors Influencing Inpatient Prolapse Surgical Costs and Length of Stay in the United States.

Authors:  Tatiana V D Sanses; Nicholas K Schiltz; Holly E Richter; Siran M Koroukian
Journal:  Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg       Date:  2016 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.091

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.