Danielle R Gartner1,2, Paul L Delamater2,3, Robert A Hummer2,4, Jennifer L Lund1,5, Brian W Pence1, Whitney R Robinson1,2,5. 1. From the Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC. 2. Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC. 3. Department of Geography, College of Arts and Sciences, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Carolina Hall, Chapel Hill, NC. 4. Department of Sociology, College of Arts and Sciences, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC. 5. Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Inequalities by race and ethnicity in hysterectomy for noncancerous conditions suggest that some subgroups may be shouldering an unfair burden of procedure-associated negative health impacts. We aimed to estimate race- and ethnicity-specific rates in contemporary hysterectomy incidence that address three challenges in the literature: exclusion of outpatient procedures, no hysterectomy prevalence adjustment, and paucity of non-White and non-Black estimates. METHODS: We used surveillance data capturing all inpatient and outpatient hysterectomy procedures performed in North Carolina from 2011 to 2014 (N = 30,429). Integrating data from the Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System and US Census population estimates, we calculated prevalence-corrected hysterectomy incidence rates and differences by race and ethnicity. RESULTS: Prevalence-corrected estimates show that non-Hispanic (nH) Blacks (62, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 61, 63) and nH American Indians (85, 95% CI = 79, 93) per 10,000 person-years (PY) had higher rates, compared with nH Whites (45 [95% CI = 45, 46] per 10,000 PY), while Hispanic (20, 95% CI = 20, 21) and nH Asian/Pacific Islander rates (8, 95% CI = 8.0, 8.2) per 10,000 PY were lower than nH Whites. CONCLUSION: Through strategic surveillance data use and application of bias correction methods, we demonstrate wide differences in hysterectomy incidence by race and ethnicity. See video abstract at, http://links.lww.com/EDE/B657.
BACKGROUND: Inequalities by race and ethnicity in hysterectomy for noncancerous conditions suggest that some subgroups may be shouldering an unfair burden of procedure-associated negative health impacts. We aimed to estimate race- and ethnicity-specific rates in contemporary hysterectomy incidence that address three challenges in the literature: exclusion of outpatient procedures, no hysterectomy prevalence adjustment, and paucity of non-White and non-Black estimates. METHODS: We used surveillance data capturing all inpatient and outpatient hysterectomy procedures performed in North Carolina from 2011 to 2014 (N = 30,429). Integrating data from the Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System and US Census population estimates, we calculated prevalence-corrected hysterectomy incidence rates and differences by race and ethnicity. RESULTS: Prevalence-corrected estimates show that non-Hispanic (nH) Blacks (62, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 61, 63) and nH American Indians (85, 95% CI = 79, 93) per 10,000 person-years (PY) had higher rates, compared with nH Whites (45 [95% CI = 45, 46] per 10,000 PY), while Hispanic (20, 95% CI = 20, 21) and nH Asian/Pacific Islander rates (8, 95% CI = 8.0, 8.2) per 10,000 PY were lower than nH Whites. CONCLUSION: Through strategic surveillance data use and application of bias correction methods, we demonstrate wide differences in hysterectomy incidence by race and ethnicity. See video abstract at, http://links.lww.com/EDE/B657.
Authors: Charlene A Wong; Melissa A Jim; Jessica King; Lillian Tom-Orme; Jeffrey A Henderson; Mona Saraiya; Lisa C Richardson; Larry Layne; Anil Suryaprasad; David K Espey Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2011-10-09 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: David K Espey; Melissa A Jim; Thomas B Richards; Crystal Begay; Don Haverkamp; Diana Roberts Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2014-04-22 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Bijan J Borah; Shannon K Laughlin-Tommaso; Evan R Myers; Xiaoxi Yao; Elizabeth A Stewart Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Danielle R Gartner; Paul L Delamater; Robert A Hummer; Jennifer L Lund; Brian W Pence; Whitney R Robinson Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2021-02-21 Impact factor: 3.734