Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T04:45:21.044Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Abdominal and Vaginal Radical Hysterectomy Among U.S. Women aged 65 Years and Older

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Saeid B. Amini ,
Steven A. Weight ,
Zhong Yuan  and
Alfred A. Rimm
Saeid B. Amini
Affiliation:
Case Western Reserve University
Steven A. Weight
Affiliation:
Case Western Reserve University
Zhong Yuan
Affiliation:
Case Western Reserve University
Alfred A. Rimm
Affiliation:
Case Western Reserve University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Unlike most European and Asian countries, radical vaginal hysterectomy (RVH) is not performed often in the United States, especially among older women. To examine the changes in RVH over the years, trends in hospital stay, hospital charges, and patient survival, we studied women aged 65 years and older undergoing RVH and compared them with patients receiving radical abdominal hysterectomy (RAH). During the study period there were a total of 288 RVH surgeries compared with 4,835 RAH surgeries. There were no significant changes in the number or proportion of RVH patients over 8 years (p =.50, trend test). On the average, RVH patients were significantly older and had shorter hospital stays. Among patients without cancer, there were no significant differences in the age, race, or survival of patients having either RVH or RAH. Similar results were obtained for patients with cancer.

Type
Research Notes
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , Spring 1996 , pp. 377 - 387
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Armitage, P.Test for linear trend in proportions and frequencies. Biometrics, 1955, 11, 375–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Baron, J. A., Lu-Yao, G., Barrett, J., et al. Internal validation of medicare claim data. Epidemiology, 1994, 5, 541–44.Google Scholar
3.Burch, J. C., & Lavely, H. T.Hysterectomy. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher, 1954.Google Scholar
4.Fisher, S. E., Whaley, F. S., Krushat, M., et al. The accuracy of Medicare's hospital claim data: Progress has been made, but problems remain. American Journal of Public Health, 1992, 82, 243–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Geisler, J. P., & Geisler, H. E.Radical hysterectomy in patients 65 years of age and older. Gynecologic Oncology, 1994, 53, 208–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Hysterectomy in the United States, 1965–1984. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics, 1987. PHS 88–1753.Google Scholar
7.International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision, clinical modification, 3rd ed.New York: Context Software System, Inc., McGraw-Hill Inc., 1994.Google Scholar
8.Kovac, S. R.Guidelines to determine the route of hysterectomy. Obstetrics & Gynecolology, 1995, 85, 18–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Meigs, J. V. Radical hysterectomy with bilateral dissection of the pelvic lymph nodes: The method of Joe V. Meigs. In Meigs, J. V. (ed.), Surgical treatment of cancer of the cervix. New York: Grune & Stratton, 1954, 149–96.Google Scholar
10.Pokras, R.Hysterectomy: Past, present, and future. Statistical Bulletin of Metropolitan Insurance Company, 1989, 70, 12–21.Google ScholarPubMed
11.Statistical abstracts of the United States 1993, 113th ed.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, 1994.Google Scholar
12.Statistical Analysis System, ver. 6.09. Cary, NC: Publisher, 1994.Google Scholar
13.Wilcox, L., Koonin, L. M., Pokras, R., et al. Hysterectomy in the Unitd States, 1988–1990. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 1994, 83, 549–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar