Samantha J Pulliam1, Daniel M Morgan, Noelani Guaderrama, Kenneth Guire, Rony A Adam. 1. From the *Division of Urogynecology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; †Division of Urogynecology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; ‡Division of Urogynecology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Southern California Permanente Medical Group, Irvine, CA; §Division of Statistics, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; and ∥Division of Urogynecology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine whether surgeon case volume is associated with preoperative evaluation of pelvic organ prolapse before a hysterectomy for uterovaginal prolapse including a complete objective evaluation of prolapse (Baden-Walker or Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification), an offer of nonsurgical options for therapy (pessary), and a preoperative assessment of urinary incontinence METHODS: We performed a multicenter retrospective review of hysterectomies done for uterovaginal prolapse at 4 hospital systems between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2011. The number of hysterectomies per surgeon for 4 years was evaluated to establish low-volume (≤10 cases), intermediate-volume (11-49 cases), and high-volume (≥50 cases) groups. Rates of preoperative standardized prolapse evaluations, offer of pessary, and evaluation of stress urinary incontinence were determined by chart review of 15% of the hysterectomy cases. Adjustment was made in a logistic regression model for age, race, insurance status, and prolapse size. RESULTS: Three hundred one surgeons performed 4238 hysterectomies for prolapse during the study period. Rates of preoperative assessment by standardized pelvic examination differed between high-, intermediate-, and low-volume surgeons (91.2% vs. 61.3% vs. 48.8%, respectively), as did offer of a pessary (86.5% vs. 71.9% vs. 69.9%, respectively) and preoperative stress test for urinary incontinence (93.5% vs. 72.8% vs. 63.5%, respectively). Regression analysis revealed that high-volume surgeons were more likely than intermediate- or low-volume surgeons to perform a standardized pelvic examination, offer a pessary, or perform preoperative evaluation for urinary incontinence. CONCLUSIONS: High-volume surgeons were more likely than low-volume surgeons to perform a standardized preoperative pelvic examination, offer a pessary, and evaluate stress urinary incontinence.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine whether surgeon case volume is associated with preoperative evaluation of pelvic organ prolapse before a hysterectomy for uterovaginal prolapse including a complete objective evaluation of prolapse (Baden-Walker or Pelvic Organ Prolapse Quantification), an offer of nonsurgical options for therapy (pessary), and a preoperative assessment of urinary incontinence METHODS: We performed a multicenter retrospective review of hysterectomies done for uterovaginal prolapse at 4 hospital systems between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2011. The number of hysterectomies per surgeon for 4 years was evaluated to establish low-volume (≤10 cases), intermediate-volume (11-49 cases), and high-volume (≥50 cases) groups. Rates of preoperative standardized prolapse evaluations, offer of pessary, and evaluation of stress urinary incontinence were determined by chart review of 15% of the hysterectomy cases. Adjustment was made in a logistic regression model for age, race, insurance status, and prolapse size. RESULTS: Three hundred one surgeons performed 4238 hysterectomies for prolapse during the study period. Rates of preoperative assessment by standardized pelvic examination differed between high-, intermediate-, and low-volume surgeons (91.2% vs. 61.3% vs. 48.8%, respectively), as did offer of a pessary (86.5% vs. 71.9% vs. 69.9%, respectively) and preoperative stress test for urinary incontinence (93.5% vs. 72.8% vs. 63.5%, respectively). Regression analysis revealed that high-volume surgeons were more likely than intermediate- or low-volume surgeons to perform a standardized pelvic examination, offer a pessary, or perform preoperative evaluation for urinary incontinence. CONCLUSIONS: High-volume surgeons were more likely than low-volume surgeons to perform a standardized preoperative pelvic examination, offer a pessary, and evaluate stress urinary incontinence.